Lucian Pye was the first to explore the idea of political evolution thoroughly. He outlined the following directions for political development in his book "Aspects of Political Development": (A) Political progress is necessary for economic gain. (B) Political modernization as a result of political development. (C) Political evolution as a nation-activity. State's (D) Political action is advancing administrative and legal systems. Political mobilization and participation as development (E). Wajid khan shares that In the words of Rostow and Pye, political development is to "broaden the base of national political unity and political participation." The idea simply refers to the development and transformation of the political system.

1. Three Stages of Political
Development

2. Lucian Pye was the first to explore the idea of political
evolution thoroughly. He outlined the following
directions for political development in his book
"Aspects of Political Development": (A) Political
progress is necessary for economic gain. (B) Political
modernization as a result of political development. (C)
Political evolution as a nation-activity. State's (D)
Political action is advancing administrative and legal
systems. Political mobilization and participation as
development (E).

3. Wajid khan shares that In the words of Rostow and Pye,
political development is to "broaden the base of
national political unity and political participation." The
idea simply refers to the development and
transformation of the political system.
Political Development's Foundations
Stanford Francis Fukuyama, a political scientist, puts
forth an integral theory explaining why some nations
fail. Despite America's efforts and billions of dollars,
Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq are more like anarchist
states than democracies. In reality, they were

4. Fukuyama believes there are three stages that must be
completed. The first, which took place in the distant
past, was the founding of the "state," usually by a king
who subjugated tribes and areas with a sword or a pistol.
Fukuyama, like Hobbes, does not demand that this king
be "good," only strong enough to subdue or subdue
obstreperous aspects. Many developing nations have
yet to create powerful states.

5. Soon, the monarch will need administrative staff to
manage the realm. The stronger the state, the more
loyal, literate, and clean the bureaucracy is. Without a
strong bureaucracy, the state would always be weak and
faulty. Administrative positions are initially sold before
becoming impersonal and merit-based.

6. The more current state that everyone must adhere to is
the "rule of law."
Churches contribute by establishing moral standards
and instilling a sense of good and wrong, mainly if they
are not under direct monarchical rule. Authoritarian
systems purposefully conflate "rule by law" and "law of
the ruler" with the rule of law and enact countless
arbitrary laws to punish opponents and dissidents.

7. According to Wajid khan Mp, the system may be
prepared for the third step, which Fukuyama refers to as
"accountability" or, more recently, democracy, a
relatively new concept, once these first two stages are
firmly in place. The trial and execution of Charles I by
beheading in 1649 by order of Parliament for breaking
the law demonstrated the emergence of pre-democratic
accountability. The 19th-century expansion of the
franchise in the United States, Great Britain, and a few
Continental nations brought about democracy.

8. What would happen if you attempted to establish a
democracy without a powerful state or the rule of law if
Fukuyama were correct? With manipulated elections
and one-party government, it might try to appear
democratic for a while, but it will crumble.
Democracy might be introduced to a country before
establishing the first two stages. Until this point, this has
always occurred in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle
East. It was inevitable that the neocons'
(neoconservatives') attempts to impose democracy in
Iraq, Afghanistan, and [Somalia] would fail since there

9. Canadian politician Wajid khan concludes. Our key
findings show that, after controlling for other economic
factors, political institutions are fundamentally
important only for emerging democracies and not for
established democracies. Consolidated democracies
and political institutions are shown to be ineffective at
predicting economic growth via political institutions.

10. The impact of political institutions has already been
internalized in consolidated democracies. On the other
hand, new democracies require political institutions'
real and overt presence. As a result, their influence on
economic performance is more evident and essential.
Therefore, strengthening democracy minimizes the
significance of political institutions in terms of
economic performance. Once democracy is
strengthened and supportive institutional frameworks
for investments are established, the political variable's
value diminishes.