PLS 131 Lecture 1

 Issues, Definitions, Theories of Comparative Politics

I.             “Comparative government” vs.  “comparative politics?”

a. Comparative government – traditional study of “configurations”

Goals:

         1. Ponder philosophical pros/cons of different governing
             arrangements

2. Collect descriptive information about governments – focusing on
             main institutions and legal system/code

         3.  Develop classificatory scheme – typology of regime types

         4.  Identify “type” that applies to specific instances

         5.  Moral endorsement/repudiation of cases as appropriate

         Examples:
         1. Study institutional characteristics

                 a. Relations among levels of government: federal vs. unitary

                 b. Relations among branches of government:

                          1. Presidential vs. parliamentary

                          2. Separation of powers vs. fusion of powers

                 c. Rights of citizens vs. the state

2. Establish classificatory scheme – “types of regimes such as democracy/dictatorship

 

·      Posit differences understood as autonomy of “linking” institutions
from state:  EXAMPLE  -

 

Contrast Democracy and Dictatorship

          3: Fit types to actual cases (countries)

                   Example:

                   Democracies: USA, Great Britain, France
                   Dictatorships: Saudi Arabia, Burma, China

          4.  Engage in normative assessment:

                   a. Why is democracy intrinsically better than dictatorship
                   b. Why citizens are unfree in Saudi Arabia, Burma
                   c. How much better off they would be if living in democracy

                   d. We should ‘help’ them achieve democracy

b. Comparative politics – behavioral and post-behavorial approaches

1. Entails the study of generalizations about countries in relation to their “politics”

         a. Politics defined by Kesselman (textbook):

·      “methods or tactics for managing a state, involving the political institutions, processes and policies generated by the state”

o  Methods/tactics defined in mostly traditional way

§  institutions of the ‘state’ back to configuration

§  Processes and policies – more modern

 

b. Politics defined more broadly

·      factors affecting the ways in which the authoritative allocation
of values takes place within a community

o  “Factors” and “Ways” very open-ended/holistic  – can include multi-disciplinary approach – economics, sociology, culture, international variables as well as narrowly ‘configurational’ elements such as government institutions

o   Authoritative allocation of values – puts “government” back in since it is the “authority”

 

         2.  Modern approaches are more open-ended in the questions they ask…

                 a. What makes some countries more “stable” than others?

                 b. Why do some countries have a larger “welfare state” than
                       others?

                 c.  Why do some countries have a larger role for an ‘official
                        religion’ than others?

                 d.  How does secularization influence the type of political
                        institutions found?

                 e.  Which type of political system is more efficient in generating
                        economic growth?

                 f.  How does the class structure of a society affect its policies?

II.           Comparative Politics: theories, concepts, hypothesis, variables

A.    Political Theories:

Political theories are composed of interrelated propositions about political phenomena. 

·      Two types: Normative and Empirical

1. Normative theories – typical of traditional ‘comparative govt’ approach

·      Discuss how things in society ought to be, given a desired set of outcomes (on freedom, equality, orderliness) derived from a philosophical perspective.

·      Typical goals – realize the ‘common good’ – basis for constitution writing

·      Names associated: Socrates, Plato, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Karl Marx, James Madison

·      Empirical research is usually incidental – argues by example, ‘thought exercises,’ pure logic – typically deductive from premises

2. Empirical Political Theory – modern alternative

·      Based on scientific method – “behavioralism”

·      Main goal of empirical political theory: Empirical theory seeks to explain causal relationships – independent and dependent

·      General components:

o  Concepts”  are parts of theories which establish basic terms and definitions: “authority,” “legitimacy,” “power,” “capitalism,” “democracy

o  Hypotheses – are educated guesses based on concepts

o  “A limited government produces greater freedom”

o  “Democracy is more stable when a society is just”

o  Variables – usually distinct from concepts because they are more measurable – have clearer empirical referents (indicators)

§  Freedom – “# of independent newspapers,” “presence of laws restricting government’s ability to limit assemblies”

§  Equality – “GINI coefficient” (measures income inequality)

§  Legitimacy – “% of citizens saying they approve current governmental arrangements”

o  Engage in systematic collection of data – falsifiable hypotheses distinguish it from normative theories

o  Seeks to establish causal relationships between two or more concepts to explain occurrence of observed political phenomena

o  Typical goals – find empirical explanations for politically salient patterns

§  Under what conditions do revolutions occur?

§  What factors lead to greater electoral turnout?

o  Policy importance – policies have an impact upon the ‘common good’ – find out empirical impact of policies

Examples:

1. Assign “independent” or “dependent” status to “political” variables –
         Political variables as independent (causal):

                 Multi-party systems will tend to have more ‘unstable’ governments

         Political variables as dependent (caused by other variables)

Federalism will be found in countries with large, heterogeneous populations that are regionally based.

III. Comparative Methods within behavorialist approach

a. Role of Method in comparative research:

·      Method is the means by which empirical data is obtained so that a theory can be derived and hypotheses tested

·      Can be quantitative or qualitative – often using countries as cases

§  Quantitative – ideal as it creates the conditions for statistical testing which is often seen as more “scientific

§  Qualitative – as with single case studies, or where very few cases are available – used more reluctantly by behavioralists

§  Data sources: census, historical/government records, surveys, election data, pamphlets, UN statistics, etc.

o  Post-behavioral – willing to be more accepting of less than perfect scientific data collection if ‘interesting’ and ‘relevant’ questions are being probed.  Seek to reintroduce elements of “normative” thinking without losing gains of scientific/behavioral approach

o  Example: Inequality among EU Countries – Regime type as a variable

1. Political classification of countries (qualitative) – Independent Variable

2. Assessment of income inequality within individual countries (raw quantitative scores) – Dependent Variable

2a.  Continued assessment of income inequality within individual countries, ranking based on different quantitative measures

3.  Assessment of individual countries’ contribution to overall EU inequality (quantitative – raw values not standardized for differing population size)

3.  Assessment of individual countries’ contribution to overall EU inequality (quantitative –standardized for differing population size)

4. Conclusion

5. Policy Implications

b. Methodological Caveats of Post-behavioral approach

1. There is a trade off between depth and breadth – the greater the empirical scope of the inquiry, the less information provided about specific cases – ask yourself which is best suited to the analysis of your hypothesis and ‘relevant’ question

 

2.  When possible, increase the number of cases, even if only by incorporating other examples and ‘compare/contrast’ efforts

 

3.  Always have some theoretical literature and hypotheses in mind, no matter how many cases are used.

See table on “Evolution of Comparative Politics: Substantive Foci and Dominant Methods”

c. Methodology as it applies to the study of countries in this class

1. Multiple case studies

 

2. Implicit and (sometimes explicit) comparisons

 

a. Use one or two countries to identify a political-economic “type”

 

b. Evaluate each country along various criteria – these are areas of
             interest

1.   Key historical events – “crises” which shaped formation of modern regimes such as identity, participation, economic development, etc.

2.   Delineation of contemporary institutional aspects of each political system

3.   Social and economic policies – how made and administered

4.   Impact of international setting

5.   Social cleavages – collective sub-national identities

 

c. Learning objectives –

1. some knowledge about what is common across countries,

2. how to usefully classify countries by commonalities,

3. how countries differ in some fundamental ways,

4. how these differences may affect values we might hold

IV.  Theoretical Focus for Comparing Counties in this Course:

         a. Political Development

         b. Transition from Traditionalism to Modernity (and beyond)

V. Political development – competing concepts

         a. Overview:

                    1. Political development (PD) part of focus on post-colonial situation in aftermath
                        of WWII – many newly created ‘countries’

 

                    2.  Search for universal generalizations – are there concepts and hypotheses that
                          might apply to a broad range of different countries?

 

                    3. Idea of development implies that countries move from ‘less’ to ‘more’ – arrow
                        of progress – change for the better

 

                    4.  Problem of ethnocentrism – can ‘progress’ be distinct from ‘emulating the
                          West?’

 

                    5.  Critical theories emphasize differences between Western experience and rest of
                          world

         b. Most “universal” concepts of “political development

 

1. The ability to ensure stability over time (S. Huntington)[1]

a.    Premises

                                                                                                    i.     Countries experience social and economic change (“modernization”)

                                                                                                  ii.     Change causes disruption of traditional lives, customs

                                                                                               iii.     Change creates new social groups who may not like traditional lives and customs

                                                                                                iv.     Political development is the ability of political institutions to adapt themselves to these changes without undergoing revolution and instability (institutionalization)

 

b.   Bias: concept favors ‘gradualism’ over ‘revolutionary change

 

c.    Advantage: concept doesn’t assume that regimes have to look like Western models, more open-ended

2. Political development as creating centralized authority and effective bureaucratic structures (State-building) –Weber, Tilly)[2] [3]

a. Premises

1.  That world is effectively divided up into states

 

2.  That states control identifiable territories

 

3.  That to control these territories they need laws and bureaucratic structures

 

a. legal framework – laws which are enforced
            through agencies such as police, regulatory units

 

b.  State requires finances – obtained through
             taxation – thus needs tax collection bureaucracy

 

c.  State has to defend itself thus needs a military

4. That success of a state partly derived from legitimacy

      a. Acceptance of state institutions, leaders and
           community by citizens

      b. Nation-building – fostering of a feeling of
           national unity
 

                                  b. Bias – views global organization of states as an inevitable
                                        end-point of development – alternative futures not
                                        considered

                                  c. Advantage – places attention on key elements of modern
                                        political systems, relatively easy to measure


 

3. Political Development as creating an effective economic system

             (Karl Marx, Adam Smith )

a. Premises

1. That for any economy to work there must be a legal framework and enforcement of property rights – whether state or private property

 

2. Creation of either market or state planning mechanisms (issuance of money, creation of plans)

3. Under capitalism, providing sufficient infrastructure to stimulate private investment

4. Under state planning system, providing enough investment capital to provide for all needs, directing resources as needed

5. Under capitalism, engaging in trade to provide needs established by markets, securing trade routes

 

6.   Under state planning, having trade relations with other countries in accordance with plan

B. Bias: Gives most emphasis to economic development as key
             determinant of political development

 

 C. Advantage: Not limited to capitalist or non-capitalist models of economic development

4. Less Universal Political Development Concepts

 

a. Political development as creating “Democracy”[4] (Democratization - See Huntington)    

1. Political rights/freedoms of individuals

2. Pluralism[5] (organized non-violent opposition)

3.Political competition, accountability (parties, parliaments)

4.Collective “group” rights?  (legal equality, social equality)

         b. Bias of democratization

                 1. Assumes a universal (rather than cultural limited) desire for individual
                       rights and political competition

a. Liberalism, individualism as universal

b. Democracy as “institutions” only, without consideration of
             context
2. Takes trajectory of Western development as desired path for all
3.  Downplays flaws with Western democracy
 

C. Crises and sequences – steps or stages of political development?[6] (Leonard Binder)

                              Premises:

                              1. A definable set of steps to becoming politically developed

                              2. Each step has a “crisis” associated with it that is a defining moment

                              3. How a political system copes with the steps affects whether it will
                                    continue to develop, or falter and collapse

                              Steps:

1. Identity – formation of common national identity

2. Penetration of state into society

3. Legitimacy – of institutions/policies to population

4. Participation – of population in governance

5. Distribution – of benefits/resources

Issues:

1.  Is the sequencing of steps inevitable?

                              2.  Can “crises” reoccur?

                              3.  Does it matter if several crises occur at the same time?

                              4.  How easily identified are these crises in historical analysis?

                              5.  Are these steps drawn too much from Western experience?

                              Advantages:

                              1. Points to useful categories applicable to many if not all countries

                              2. Even if sequencing is not completely predictable, it has a positive
                                   influence upon sensitizing us to the possibility that a nation-state is built
                                   through some steps

VI.  The transition from traditional to modern society (“modernization theory”)

         a. Premises

                 1. Traditional society as a useful theoretical construct (ideal type)

                 2.  Modern society used as opposite pole

                 3.  Actual societies identified as laying somewhere
                    “between” traditionalism and modernity

                          a. Transition between traditionalism and modernity termed
                              “Modernization”

                 4. Key conceptual issue: identify components of each ideal type
                 5. Analytical use: link to political development and political culture[7] (Almond/Verba)

         b. Contrasts between traditionalism and modernity

                 1.  What are elements of the ideal types?

                          a. Technology

                          b. Cultural traits – structures and attitudes

                          c. Outcomes – conditions of life

                 2. Technology/organization

                          a. Based on prevalence of sources of power – animate/inanimate

                          b. Production system – manufacturing/services vs.
                               agriculture/mining

                                1. Complex division of labor
                          c. Scientific approach to technology vs. religious beliefs

                 3. Cultural traits

a. Tonnies -  Gemeinschaft and Gessellschaft
b. Parsons  - the “pattern variables”

c. Sacred vs. Secular – secularization as modernization

                 4. Outcomes of modernization

a. Higher standard of living
b. Longer life expectancy
c. Demographic change – urbanization

d. Workforce changes – skills, education highly valued
d. Improved communications
e. Greater citizen self-awareness of place in world
f.  More demands for participation, status equalization

VII. Is modernization just “westernization?

                    Premise: 1.  Modernization simply takes traits associated with Western
                                          countries and generalizes them as ‘nature of modernity’

                                   2.   Assumes unilinear evolution – same path for all

                                   3.   Assumes that lack of modernization is due to lack of contact with
                                           modern (i.e., Western) countries. (Diffusionist theory) .[8] (Ronald Chilcote)
                  Advantages:

                                  1. Western countries have desirable traits, do form model of
                                         market capitalism
                                  2.  Demonstration effect likely to be powerful tool to increase
                                          awareness of alternatives to traditional societies/elites

                  Weaknesses:

                                  1.  Dependency/Underdevelopment thesis says: [9] (Gunder Frank)

                                           a. Western contact was as colonial power

                                           b.  Western goals were not altruistic

                                           c.  Economic dependency of colonies led to adverse
                                                  consequences:

                 1. Concentrated on production of raw materials

                 2. Obliged to purchase finished goods from
                      colonizing countries

                 3.  Infrastructure only developed to perpetuate
                       dependency relationship

                 4.  “Island of development” in “sea of
                        underdevelopment”
                 5.  Poverty remains rampant

                 6.  Weak states (corrupt, dictatorial, without much
                        administrative nor technical capacity) in many
                        former colonies

7.  Former colonies are weak in international
arena – low on pyramid of power

2. Center, semi-periphery, periphery – capitalist world system has changed over last 50 years (The World is Flat -notion popularized by Thomas Friedman)

 

         a. More outsourcing of manufacturing to semi-
             periphery and periphery

         b. Greater communications and transportation creates
             more development opportunities outside center

         c. Social contracts within Center (Fordism) coming
              under fire due to competition from non-center areas

         d. Differential development potential in global regions

 

3. Alternatives to Westernization?

                                           a. Communism – planned economy, single party rule

                                           b. Islamic reaction – revenge of the sacred, new hybrid