As part of our regime classification, Group 5 will separate political regimes in a range from Western Liberal Democracy (WLD) to Totalitarianism. With a range of Partial democracy, Illiberal democracy, Competitive authoritarianism, and Authoritarianism in between. Each country evaluated will be tested under each term to determine 'best fit', then placed on a graph using the values of competitive elections/ popular participation and civil liberties/ personal freedoms.
This group defines competitive elections following Jennifer Ghandi's model, where a party must be able to lose an election (very minimal), we further define civil liberties as:
  1. Freedom of speech
  2. Freedom of action
  3. Freedom of association
  4. Freedom from political repression
  5. Independence of media sources
  6. Separation of the Judiciary and the Executive Branch of government
An ideal society/ nation state would satisfy all of the above, whereas, the fewer conditions met, the more repressive a regime.

The following is a graph that reflects how New Zealand (competitive elections and all of the liberties satisfied) and North Korea (no elections and none of the civil liberties satisfied) would fit into out classification.

A democracy is an electoral system under which there are free fair and regular elections with multiple parties. There must be checks and balances on the power of the executive and the judiciary.

Participatory Democracy
Arguably exampled by states such as Venezuela under Chavez and perhaps even Cuba under Castro, participatory democracy lacks some or several aspects of the WLD model exampled above, however the regime is still popular and the state maintains an interest in serving the public good.

Illiberal Democracy
Illiberal Democracy deviates from the WLD model by having several of the key aspects either weak (such as the electoral system being tampered with in a minor way) or absent. It still actively maintains some aspects of democracy and may very likely be a popular regime. As argued by Levitsky and Way, there may be little history of democratic institutions or traditions that lead Illiberal Democracies to be susceptible Authoritarianism.

Competitive Authoritarianism
Straddling to slippery fence along with Illiberal Democracy, Competitive Authoritarianism is a system that is lacking, perhaps heavily lacking, many aspects and institutions that define Democracy. These may be evident in biased election results, an un-level playing field for opposition candidates, a lack of civil liberties or some other aspect(s) of WLD.

A regime or system run by an individual or group, who has control over many aspects of their population's civil, economic, religious, political, social and cultural lives. This takes away from one of the basic precepts of individual freedom of choice touted by Western Liberal Standards. Authoritarianism regimes may include elections, however they are either so corrupt, biased, or tampered with to a degree that makes them invalid.

The most extreme form of authoritarianism, Totalitarianist regimes control most or all spheres of the lives of their populous. These regimes may also include a 'Cult of Personality', or a strong ideological focus, examples include Stalin's USSR and the Kim Dynasty in North Korea.