Lesson Report:
Title: From States to Regimes: Mapping Power and Control with a 10-Point Diagnostic
Synopsis: The class transitioned from the prior unit on “the state� to the concept of “regimes,� using a UK–North Korea parliamentary contrast to motivate how similarly “healthy� states can operate under very different rule-sets. Students built a two-dimensional regime map (who holds power vs. how much societal control) and a 10-point checklist of indicators, then applied the framework to a fictional country to practice evidence-based regime classification.
Attendance
– Number of students mentioned absent: 0 (instructor noted a “full houseâ€� after roll call)
Topics Covered (chronological, with activity anchors)
– Announcements and timeline
– Midterm: end of October (reminder).
– Field Reflection Paper: due mid-November.
– U.S. ambassador visit to AUCA: next Friday; strong recommendation to attend, listen for themes/topics, and use it to shape possible questions.
– Video comparative warm-up: Legislatures in practice
– Materials: Two short clips showing legislative sessions in the UK House of Commons (debate related to Gaza) and North Korea’s Supreme People’s Assembly.
– Prompts:
– Identify which state institution is shown: students correctly named Parliament/Legislative Branch.
– Note the most salient differences and what they imply about “rules of the state.â€�
– Key observations elicited:
– Order vs. chaos: Highly contentious, “chaotic engagementâ€� in the UK with booing, interruptions, and visible disagreement vs. orderly, uniform acclamation in North Korea.
– Engagement and speech: UK lawmakers visibly react and challenge; North Korean delegates show conformity and limited visible debate.
– Instructor caveat: The UK is not always chaotic; North Korea would likely not display comparable contention even on polarizing topics.
– Framing insight: Both are effective states, yet their “rules of the gameâ€� differ, motivating the need for the concept of regimes.
– Conceptual bridge: State vs. regime via hardware/software analogy
– State = hardware (institutions, buildings, buses, parliament, courts—tangible apparatus).
– Regime = software/operating system (the rule-set that dictates how power is acquired, used, and distributed through the state).
– Implication: The same “hardwareâ€� can run different “softwareâ€� (e.g., the same parliament under different regime rules).
– Building a regime map: Two axes to locate regime types
– Axes:
– X-axis: Who holds power? Many (distributed) → Few (concentrated).
– Y-axis: How much control does government have over society? Low control → Total control.
– Student placements of ideal types:
– Totalitarianism: Top-right (few hold power; total state control across legal, economic, and social spheres; e.g., North Korea).
– Anarchy: Bottom-left (power perfectly diffused; no coercive state institutions; decisions by consent).
– Authoritarianism: Right-of-center with high-but-not-total control (small ruling group; some social/economic freedoms remain; student example: Russia).
– Liberal democracy: Mid-left with moderate-low control (popular influence and protections exist, but not perfectly equal power for all; variety across cases; U.S. noted as a republic variant to be unpacked in a later unit on elections).
– The 10-point regime diagnostic (slider framework)
– Purpose: Create a nuanced, evidence-based placement for real countries by rating each indicator along a spectrum.
– Indicators and endpoints:
1) Media independence: Total freedom/independence �→ Total government control.
2) Political parties/competition: Easy entry and real competition �→ One party, no opposition.
3) Elections: Free, fair, open (no coercion/corruption) �→ No elections.
4) Distribution of power (separation of powers): Broadly distributed among branches �→ One branch/person holds all power.
5) Government control of ideology/speech: No control over beliefs/speech �→ Total control over beliefs/speech.
6) Constitution’s function: Limits government power �→ Limits citizens (ineffective at constraining government).
– Note: Constitutions are higher-order law intended to constrain government; permanence and amendment procedures vary by system.
7) Civil liberties/civil rights protection: Maximum protection (no punishment for exercising rights) �→ No protection (punishment/common).
– Clarification: Rights are best understood as protections from punishment for expression, religion, assembly, etc., not merely the ability to act.
8) Interest groups’ independence: Fully independent of the state �→ No independence (state corporatism/party-run groups).
– Example: Soviet-era unions as extensions of the party/state (low independence).
9) Economy/state control: No state control (market-driven) �→ Total/planned economy (prices, sectors, and entry controlled by state).
10) Military control: Limited, divided civilian control with separate military law/jurisdiction �→ Total control by ruling leader/party; military integrated into regime.
– Examples: U.S. has mixed/limited control with congressional war powers and AUMFs complicating practice; Nazi Germany integrated the military within the party apparatus (total control).
– Guided application: Fictional country diagnostic
– Material: A diagnostic paragraph for a fictional state (referred to in-class as the Republic of Arinas/Rios; a made-up case posted on e-courses).
– Summary of the case description (for modeling evidence-to-slider reasoning):
– Leadership: Same president for 18 years (National Stability Party).
– Elections: Multi-party elections every 5 years; incumbent never loses; advantages via control over state resources and media coverage.
– Constitution: Guarantees of speech/assembly exist but are selectively interpreted.
– Media: High self-censorship around criticism of the president.
– Protest/assembly: Small protests sometimes allowed; organizers of large demonstrations punished.
– Interest groups: Officially independent unions but led by regime allies (co-optation).
– Economy: Mixed system; most profitable sectors (oil/mining) controlled by companies owned by the president’s family/close allies; widespread corruption reports.
– Military: Professional but deeply intertwined with regime; generals hold prominent government roles; official messaging emphasizes “national stability and progress.â€�
– Pair-work instructions:
– Re-read the paragraph.
– Use the 10 sliders to place the country for each indicator, citing specific textual cues.
– Be prepared to justify each placement.
– Instructor modeling of expected inference patterns (implicit in discussion):
– Media: Toward government control (self-censorship, regime media access).
– Parties: Limited competition (dominant-party advantage); not one-party in law.
– Elections: Formally present but substantively skewed; not free/fair; not abolished.
– Distribution of power: Concentrated in executive and loyalists.
– Ideology control: Regime messaging present; not total thought control.
– Constitution: Weak at constraining government; applied to constrain citizens’ actions.
– Civil liberties: Limited protection; selective allowances with punishment for large-scale dissent.
– Interest groups: Low independence (officially independent but de facto controlled).
– Economy: Mixed but with strategic sectors captured by ruling family/allies; corruption.
– Military: Significant political entanglement (generals in government); high control by regime.
Actionable Items
– Time-sensitive
– Share details for next Friday’s U.S. ambassador visit (time, venue, access constraints) and encourage attendance; suggest students prepare one thoughtful question or listening goal.
– Post to e-courses:
– Links to the two legislative session videos (UK House of Commons; North Korean assembly).
– The 10-point checklist graphic/sliders.
– The fictional country diagnostic paragraph (ensure final version and naming consistency).
– Confirm midterm date, format, and scope (states + regimes); provide a study outline.
– For next class
– Ask students to select a real country and pre-rate it on the 10 sliders with brief evidence (1–2 credible sources per slider), to facilitate in-class mapping and discussion.
– Prepare a short clarification note on “democracy vs. republicâ€� to preview distinctions that will be covered during the elections unit.
– Ongoing/administrative
– Field Reflection Paper: circulate rubric and examples; reiterate due mid-November.
– Clean up minor transcription inconsistencies in the fictional case (country name; leader’s name/spelling; “multi-partyâ€� vs. “multi-borderâ€�) so students reference a single authoritative version.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK
The transcript only includes reminders about upcoming assessments (“we went over the two major assignments… midterm… field reflection paper”) and a recommended event (“I advise you to please go to that meeting”), while the only task posted on eCourse (“we have this diagnostic paragraph posted”) was conducted in class (“with our last minutes… with your partner… re-read this paragraph… put the dot”), with no instruction to complete or submit anything after class.