Any novice political scientist, sociologist, or anthropologist can be easily established that peace between democracies is based on shared democratic norms or political institutions. The relationship of relative peace among democracies is a result of some features of democracy; and it is not caused exclusively by economic or geopolitical characteristics of the state. The first is that the origins of relations between democratic nations exist only in a global context.
The second assumption is all international relations between democratic nations are viewed from historical context, and last coalitions between democratic nations focus on the mechanism of domination. Under the primary assumption the “big picture” ideology is paramount and primary to the approach to actual governance. The idea that the parts are less important to the whole is the mission and objective of peace. This assumption makes no room for nationalism or protectionism. With these facts well rooted and the historical precedent well citied we can view this case study on a far in depth level. After cross referencing conflict based on global empirical patterns over the period 1965-99.” Over this period, “the risk of civil war” became “systematically related to a few economic conditions, such as dependence on primary commodity exports and low national income . Objective measures of social grievance, such as inequality, a lack of democracy, and ethnic and religious divisions, have had little systematic effect on risk.” in short, if rebellion presents itself as the ultimate protest movement, it will attract as noncombatant supporters those who normally support protest movements.”
Three factors that are traditionally viewed as key to predatory rebellion. The first is the presence of primary commodity exports in an economy that is dependent on them. The ability to create a stable economy and maintain the social contract is the very foundation of a nation state maintain the will of the people to allow its government to rule. With a the ability to maintain the social contract a government fore fits its authority.. The second is the presence of a rebel organization plunges the society from peace into civil war, and the costs of war are likely to outweigh the costs of government predation. “The presence of military dictators within its officer ranks or extremist groups both left and right present the internal and existential threat to the nation state. The third is that under developed countries tend to create ideal conditions due to the high poverty levels low literacy rates as opposed to stable developed countries. Coller is quoted as saying that “inequality does not seem to affect the risk of conflict. Rebellion seems not to be the rage of the poor.”
To understand this concept one only has to look to Nigeria the Northwestern African nations of 168 Million according to the CIA and literacy rate of 61% over the age of 15 with the ability to read and write. It is this fact that denotes the “The economic theory of conflict argues that these people have been taken in by accepting the discourse at face value.” “History matters because if a country has recently had a civil war, its risk of further war is much higher. Immediately after the end of hostilities there is a 40 percent chance of further conflict.” Other important factors that matter in attempting to discern whether it is greed or grievance that foments civil conflict are the political activism of and financial support from diaspora. According to political scientist , “diasporas appear to make life for those left behind much more dangerous in post conflict situations.” “to predict a civil war, it is surely more useful to focus on near-term indicators such as political incidents and rising violence.”
At the same time, the model is useful in pointing to the typical structural risks and so provides some guidance on longer-term policies for prevention.” Societal or structural analyses, widely utilized by sociologists, economists and political scientists, emphasize the association of particular behaviors with certain cultures, classes or ethnic groups. (Such analyses stress the importance of economic hard times, governmental policies or technological changes on individual patterns of behavior.) Individual level analysis, frequently used by clinical or personality psychologists, explain behavior in terms of a person’s unique life history and psychological characteristics. Such works assume that personality traits explain why individuals behave as they do.) Falling somewhere between the microlevel explanations, social psychological analysis is more interpersonal than societal or individual. (It focuses more on how immediate social Influences other people in the environment, their attitudes and behaviors, and their relationship to the individual actor explain whether the actor will engage in-group conflict.