Political Science Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Political Science - Essay ExampleThe first smell is that the theory should explain why interethnic relations argon mostly based on tension and mistrust. The second one should explain why the results of interethnic relations are peace and cooperation instead of violence. Lastly, it should explain why in some situations interethnic relations result in whirls of violence or sometimes in war. According to Fearon and Laitin, interethnic conflicts pay back claimed over ten million lives worldwide since the end of the Second World War (715). However, the approach of many scholars to analyzing this situation is one-sided, especially while selecting the cases of ethnic conflicts. They localize mainly on post-Soviet and African countries where actual cases of ethnic violence are relatively fewer than potential cases of ethnic violence. In order to avoid biased selection of ethnic violence cases, there is the need for theories that not only account for causes of ethnic violence but also t he outcomes of ethnic tension some former(a) than violence. The first are rationalist theories, which refer to ethnic congregations as joint forces that take or defend beneficial materials from others. These materials include education, labor and state investments. In case one ethnic classify denies the other the right to possess a certain material, then violence would result between the two groups. The others are psychological theories that refer to ethic groups as a satisfaction to the need of belonging to a group. Therefore, in this case ethnic violence may top if one group threatens the psychological satisfaction of the other. In addition to rationalist and psychological theories, game theories would be more precise in explaining outcomes of ethnic conflicts other than violence. Game theories consist of spiral equilibrium and in-group policing equilibrium. Spiral equilibrium is where an individual action during the game is taken to be a joint action of the satisfying group. In this case, all portions of group A punish group B members following unacceptable behavior from one member of group B. A oneness player from either group immediately triggers a state of complete breakdown of cooperation that once existed between the groups. On the other hand, in-group policing equilibrium is where one group ignores violating actions from the other group, assuming that the other group is going to take disciplinary action against the individual that caused the violation (Fearon and Laitin 730). In this case, a defection of a member from either group does not affect the reaction of the other group. Instead of members from group B resolveing negatively to members in group A because one of the members from group A portrayed unacceptable behavior, the game continues as if nothing had happened. In some cases, there is the presence of noise which, in this context, refers to additional defections such as drunkenness, misinterpretations or sudden passions. In such a cas e, the best theoretical approach to addressing ethnic outcome would be in-group policing equilibrium. In group policing, unlike spiral regime, punishment is only applicable to the individual responsible for a defection. The other reason that makes in-group policing more appropriate is the fact that in spiral equilibrium members respond to a tiny issue in the same way they would respond to a serious