POSSIBLE STATES.Comparative politics simulationsHow to use this
Menu

← Back to your results / The Order Was Given

Authoritarianism

AuthoritarianismState & society

Authoritarian control, meaningful competition & causal reasoning

The Order Was Given

The order is clear. Whose cooperation does it actually secure?

Organize a legal opposition transport campaign in authoritarian Lydora. Publish two promises, approach four independent organizations and learn from three rounds of replies. Then change one public-venue access rule and explain what it changes, what it leaves in place and what you still cannot know about votes.

How it runsSolo simulation
Time to plan50–60 min
What you produceEvidence report with original forecasts, explanations, a controlled access comparison, revisions and a transfer argument
Just exploringFor class

The same political choices in both routes. You can switch inside without starting over. For class asks you to complete any missing required responses. Save a report in either route; your instructor decides what to accept.

For class: download your report when you finish, then submit it through your course website. Downloading does not submit it.

Check Saved on this device. Use Save & files → Download backup before changing websites, browsers or devices; Restore backup reopens the JSON. A readable report does not restore progress.

Saving & submission →
Embed this activity

Bring the activity into your course.

Paste this snippet into an LMS or website HTML editor that supports iframes. The activity stays hosted by Possible States; its source code is not included.

Keep the full-tab link included below the frame. Some LMSs and browsers restrict embedded storage, downloads or printing. Students should download a backup before changing views; opening a new tab does not transfer an in-memory record.

Embedding and free-use permissions →
The Order Was Given. Created by Yoav Duman. Young campaign organizers meet at a modest table beside an imposing fictional bus terminal, in a red, cream and dark-green political poster.

What you can explore

  • Distinguish a public official’s venue control from an organization’s own implemented resource decision.
  • Explain how meaningful competition can persist within a seriously unequal authoritarian setting.
  • Separate resources and speaking opportunity from individual votes and electoral victory.
  • Isolate one access rule’s direct effect, revisit a forecast and transfer an explanation conditionally.

YOUR CAMPAIGN KIT

Keep the evidence and the argument.

Play online or take the complete game and printable guides into class. Original forecasts and later revisions remain distinct.

Saves are separate on each website and device. Download a JSON backup to move work; submit the exported report through your course system.

What the model leaves open

Lydora, its people, decisions and numerical rules are fictional. The organizations’ practical independence tonight is stipulated; it does not demonstrate weak state capacity, unreliable coercion or ruling-party fragmentation. The comparison holds all organization choices fixed. No election result is generated. The game primes questions before the assigned article, rather than teaching its full explanation.

AFTERWARD, THINK ABOUT

Which part of Ari’s order took effect directly, and which outcomes depended on other actors’ decisions?

Teaching this activity Debrief, assessment & assignment draft

Bring it back to the room

  • Which part of Ari’s order took effect directly, and which outcomes depended on other actors’ decisions?
  • Did shared terminal access remove the ruling party’s other advantages?
  • What did the access-only comparison hold fixed, and what remains unknown about votes?
  • What would you need to investigate before predicting whether the sports club can refuse the new mayor’s order?

What to assess

Assess a concrete actor, decision and resource/time consequence; use of one revealed terminal decision and one organization reply; the scope of the controlled comparison; thoughtful reconsideration; and two conditional transfer predictions. Completion checks presence and length, not reasoning. Recruiting everyone, maximizing reach or preferring a party is not the correct answer.

Read the complete teaching guide →

Syllabus description, rubric & printable companion →

Prepare an assignment to share.

Edit this text, then copy it into Canvas or your course website. These edits stay in this tab.

Syllabus description & discussion prompts
Syllabus description
Organize a legal opposition transport campaign in authoritarian Lydora. Publish two promises, approach four independent organizations and learn from three rounds of replies. Then change one public-venue access rule and explain what it changes, what it leaves in place and what you still cannot know about votes. Students produce evidence report with original forecasts, explanations, a controlled access comparison, revisions and a transfer argument.
Questions for a discussion board or class debrief
  1. Which part of Ari’s order took effect directly, and which outcomes depended on other actors’ decisions?
  2. Did shared terminal access remove the ruling party’s other advantages?
  3. What did the access-only comparison hold fixed, and what remains unknown about votes?
  4. What would you need to investigate before predicting whether the sports club can refuse the new mayor’s order?
Open printable teaching companion →