domestic politics and war

● Interest can be particularistic or national. A national interest would be an example of national security and trade protection would be particularistic to the protected sector. Domestic institutions assist in determining All decisions are made, who runs for government and how disputes are fixed. They can even reduce decision-making power or set up checks and balance on power. Some countries are autocratic, others are controlled by elected officials. So domestic institutions create motivation for both, but can also force the options for war.

● They are four different types of domestic actors that are important for understanding policy matters:

● Leaders - foreign policy decision makers

● Bureaucracy - a system of government where there are levels

● Interest groups

● General public

● leaders and war: the rally effects

● The rally effect is defined as the people's will to be more supportive of their State's government in times of crisis and war. Studies show that in the hours of crisis or war the general public will support the government more. Even people who oppose the government will back off and let them have their way. This gives the government the chance to push their policies without the fear of any opposing backlash.

● leaders and war: diversionary incentives

● International conflict can create a diversion from local problems (e.g., economic scandals or downturn) that could have otherwise drag down a leader's popularity. International conflict tends to drive other problems out of the headline news and they give armed leaders and opportunity to put blame on foreigners for the country's problems — a case called scapegoating. Moreover, there is little evidence that shows that leaders birth wars in order to establish a rally.

● US battle deaths and public support for war

● Leaders care about the general public's opinion because they're trying to get into office and once they're in office they tend to think how can I maintain my position? In democracies, this is done through elections, ads and running campaigns and in autocracies this is done by eliminating the opponent. No, there are a few unique groups that might influence and have their personal interests in going to war that are different from national interests: bureaucratic interests, ideological or ethnic interest groups, political parties and economic interest groups.

● institutions and war

● Some institutions can affect war. For example, it has been said that democracies put a damper on war because they focus on harmony between the elite and the masses; Leaders (e.g., senators, the president, house representatives, etc) are held accountable or have to go through an election to be elected. In addition, in democracies (and in other places), the majority of the population is affected. For instance, 3% of the population in the United States are connected to the military. Therefore, the rest of the population (e.g., friends, families, and towns) are all impacted when are men and women go to war. There's also the free media that gives us access to information which helps us make better judgments about the actions of our leaders. However, the Democratic process can be sluggish which leaves time for interest-bargaining. Sometimes, as countries move from being autocracies to democracies, we can get messy and even volatile and sometimes can increase the likelihood of conflict.

● institutions in war: democratic peace

● The Democratic peace argument states a robust allegation that shared democracy alters bargaining interaction as a whole. Some scholars recommend that democracy stick to the rule of nonviolence for mutual respect and dealings with each other. In this sense, they might be looked at as part of a divided community of States. This gives information into why they approach autocracies with mistrust and suspicion. Even those studies have shown robust correlations between a democracy and peace, this does not mean they're the cause of it. We're still not sure which reason mentioned about are why we don't see problems or wars. Maybe peace causes democracy, not the other way around.

●