For instance, if one ethnic group is powerful enough to deny basic civil rights to other ethnic groups, then political decisions will be made solely to benefit the dominant group rather than society as a whole. To give an example of this we can look at Moldova. In Way’s article “Weak States and Pluralism: The Case of Moldova” he argues that ‘Moldova’s weak state, tenuous elite networks, and polarized politics have provided key sources of democracy in the post- Soviet period’ (Way, 2003: 454), he goes on to say that ‘In cases of pluralism by default, politics remain competitive because the government is too polarized and the state too weak to monopolize political control in an international environment dominated by democratic powers’ (Way, 2003: 455). Therefore weak pluralism in Moldova occurred through the division over national identity along with weak elite networks that had their roots within soviet era, which were characterized by individualism. Conversely looking at the third concern we look at strong
For instance, if one ethnic group is powerful enough to deny basic civil rights to other ethnic groups, then political decisions will be made solely to benefit the dominant group rather than society as a whole. To give an example of this we can look at Moldova. In Way’s article “Weak States and Pluralism: The Case of Moldova” he argues that ‘Moldova’s weak state, tenuous elite networks, and polarized politics have provided key sources of democracy in the post- Soviet period’ (Way, 2003: 454), he goes on to say that ‘In cases of pluralism by default, politics remain competitive because the government is too polarized and the state too weak to monopolize political control in an international environment dominated by democratic powers’ (Way, 2003: 455). Therefore weak pluralism in Moldova occurred through the division over national identity along with weak elite networks that had their roots within soviet era, which were characterized by individualism. Conversely looking at the third concern we look at strong