A political realm often defines a country’s state in terms of stability or instability. Colombia constitutes no exception to this common view of the political milieu. The political landscape of Colombia in 1850-1950 demonstrated the social and economic nuances that explain the stability and instability of this country in its modern epoch (Mazzuca Robinson, 2006). Since people often need equal representation and peace in order to perform their economic activities effectively, it is important to understand the sources of these desires. Thus, the analysis of the Colombian political legacy shows the contribution of political conflict and power sharing to the country’s modern status.

Hypothesis: The political conflict between the conservatives and liberals led to power sharing that has since resulted in peace in modern Colombia.

The division between the two primary parties that dominated the political realm in Colombia led to a series of conflicts in this country. The liberals and conservatives had the opposite views on the issues of the control and ruling of the country. Thus, between 1860 and 1930, Olimpo Radical and Hegemonía Conservadora defined the political history of Colombia. This period remains peculiar in that both liberals and conservatives participated in taking crucial political decisions while operating totally different sets of policies. As a result, Colombia experienced chaos that aimed at ending the colonial heritage. In fact, the need for institutional reform became imperative during that time. The failure of the revolt that took place between 1876 and 1877 led to the formation of a coalition between the dissident liberals and conservatives (Mazzuca Robinson, 2006). This strategy became effective since it led to the displacement of the radical liberals from power. Therefore, it is true that the political conflict paved the way for the power sharing that led to the birth of modern Colombia.

Moreover, power sharing in Colombia began with moving from a majoritarian system to the incomplete vote one. According to the latter, two-thirds of the seats would go to the party that won elections while the remaining one third would go to the minority party regardless of the percentage of votes it won. The quotient rule later replaced the complete vote, a transition that occurred in 1929 (Mazzuca Robinson, 2006). From this period onwards, the political policies in Colombia have hinged on proportional representation, a move that defined its modern status. The integration of the proportional representation into political decisions in Colombia was the result of the negotiations in which the conservatives and liberals worked cooperatively. The introduction of these policies occurred during the second half of the reign of the Conservative Republic. At this point, it is vital to explore the possible impetus for the move by the conservatives and liberals to accept proportional representation and abandon the majoritarian approach to elections (Albala, 2017). One of the possible reasons was the need to attain political pacification by preventing the insurrection of the military by the liberals. Besides, the conservatives aimed to avoid civil war as well as looming political instability. In addition, the need to have a government that would be represented by people necessitated the power sharing. The conservatives held the view that the majoritarian approach would not allow for fair representation. Therefore, power sharing in Colombia resulted from the political conflict that existed between the liberals and conservatives. It led to the abolition of the majoritarian form of elections and the adoption of proportional representation approach.

In conclusion, political conflict and power sharing led to the realization of modern Colombia. Historically, the use of a majoritarian approach in this country led to the underrepresentation of the parties. As a result, a conflict between the conservatives and liberals began. The only way to avoid civil war and gain stability was to share power between these two parties. Therefore, a proportional representation became an alternative to the majoritarian method of elections. 

I want to express my heartfelt gratitude for taking the time to read my article. Your engagement means the world to me, and I truly appreciate your interest in the topics I've shared. If you enjoyed what you've read so far, I invite you to explore more content on the best place to buy essays . There's a plethora of articles covering various subjects, and I'm confident you'll find something that resonates with you.