Comparative Politics: Main Approaches

1
Comparative Politics Main Approaches

• Curtis
• Systems Theory
• Communication Theory
• Structural Functionalism
• Behavioralism
• Rational Choice
• Institutional Analysis
• Statistical Analysis
• Political Development
• Dependency Theory
• Political Culture
• Political Attitudes
• Political Cleavages
• Globalization

• Lane
• Behavioral Revolution
• Developmentalism/Dependency
• The Return of the State
• (Historical and Rational Choice) New
  Institutionalism

They differ in the way of posing problems, the
choice of relevant dimensions, and their
methodological orientations
2
Theory and the Art of Comparative Politics

• Ruth Lane Chapter 6

3
What is a Theory in Comparative Politics?

• (Common sense approach) one-dimensional position
  (organizing all theories along a scale in which
  my favorite approach ranks the best)
• Lane This approach to theory is egocentric and
  dogmatic

4
(Instead) Two Strategies

• Analysis of different forms of theory
• Study of model building

5
Forms of theory

• Michels iron law of oligarchy (old,
  pre-behavioral form of theory)
• Functionalism
• Rational Choice
• a picture of a real theory is worth a thousand
  definitions (Lane)

6
1. Michels Iron Law of Oligarchy

• Michels theory has the form of a universal law
• Theory of Oligarchy All organizations are
  oligarchical
• every organ of the collectivity, brought into
  existence through the need for the division of
  labour, creates for itself as soon as it becomes
  consolidated, interests peculiar to itself
  (Michel, qtd. by Lane 127)
• The desire to dominate others is inherent to
  humankind

7
Michels Iron Law of Oligarchy

• Michel departs from understanding that there is a
  need for leadership among human beings, because
  the masses are not capable of governing
  themselves
• Although we may be all equal in principle, there
  is no possibility to for us to exercise power
  directly (says Michel) and therefore we need to
  designate representatives, who specialize in
  governing us and tend to stay in office for a
  long time
• (Mass voting Mass disempowerment)
• Organizations generate oligarchies, yet
  disorganization carries even worse consequences
• Change arises from competition between
  oligarchies and their (opportunistic)
  displacement
• (not democracies but polyarchies)

8
Michels Iron Law of Oligarchy

• Michel connects observable variables with a
  logically consistent argument into a theory, or
  a connected set of propositions that say
  something definite about the real world (Lane
  129)
• His propositions are both of universal reach
  (parties, unions, the government, the state) and
  falsifiable (Can you find a case that contradicts
  the theory?)
• As all theories, Michels explains specific
  aspects of reality

9
2. Functionalism

• Functionalism/Structural Functionalism (developed
  within Behavioralism)
• Almond, Parsons, Coleman, Easton
• Main Assumption Both social and political
  systems perform all of the functions that are
  needed by the survival of the system.
• Ex adaptation, interest articulation, rule
  making
• Tautological structure? The argument tends to
  assume what it should be explained
• Tendency to recognize functions to existent
  institutions

10
Middle Range Functionalism Robert Merton

• Merton used functionalism as a tool of research.
  Instead of assuming that functions are performed,
  Merton explored, described, and analyzed them.
• He argued that social functions should be
  inferred from objective phenomena that we can
  observe
• Nuanced approach
• Functions may be manifest or latent
• Identification of both functions and dysfunctions
• Functions arise from social needs (dysfunctions
  call for the elimination or change of the
  structures providing for them)
• Middle Range theory builds up from empirical
  observation
• Whenever people feel dissatisfied, there is a
  social need that sooner or later will create a
  functional opportunity

11
3. The Political Economy/Rational Choice Approach

• Dominant in American politics and International
  Relations
• Not so popular in Comparative Politics
• Because of the complexity and diversity of
  problems we deal with
• Rational choice theories are logical, consistent,
  and parsimonious
• Yet they rely on very strong assumptions on the
  nature of individuals and humankind (?
  maximizer/economic beings)

12

• Whereas individualism, selfishness, and a
  maximizers rationality may be spread in market
  societies such as ours, comparative studies
  suggest that these characteristics are not
  species-like but historically (re)produced and
  circumscribed
• Thus, the theorys universal claims seem weak

13
Cultural Rationalities

• Rational choice scholars effort to expand the
  definition of rationality (to be rational,
  goals must not necessarily be individually or
  economically oriented. Goals defined by ethics,
  religion, altruism, can be rational)
• Identification of patterns and operating
  principles from different cultures and societies
• Achievement Openness to include different forms
  of rationality
• Risk Is any single reason inspiring behavior
  rational?

14
Methods of Theory Building

• Lave and March (1975)
• Theory Models
• Theory is Practical
• Basic Rule Start with a fact and ask how it
  might have come about.
• Answers Hypotheses (need to be tested)

15
Steps

• Processes underlying events
• Implications (logical connectors that make
  different political situations understandable)
• Generalizability (arises not from statistics but
  from the common core of the political process.
  Clarifying a process at one level may illuminate
  other levels)
• Quality of Explanation (test your explanation
  with an eight-year-old). Not only prediction, but
  exposition of the logic of the causal
  connections.

16
The Politics Model

• Neither progress, nor democracy nor
  development are seen as independent forces
  anymore But just individuals and groups
• Practical confrontation of individuals and groups
  using different resources

17
The Politics Model

1. Identify major participants
2. Identify both individual and group ideas
   (political culture)
3. Assess the participants resources
4. Assess the structure of opportunities and
   constraints
5. Examine functional opportunities and alternatives

18
Common Pattern

• Because of a given situation then a certain
  situation arose, which changed the political
  situations of the participants, so that a new
  situation ensued and so on until one reaches the
  conclusion that this interlocked set of processes
  has provided an explanation.(Lane 140)

19
For the final exam, examine and discuss a problem
in a comparative perspective. You will write on
three (or more) countries, and will have to
include the United States in your (comparative)
analysis. Include also Mexico, China, India,
Russia, or one of the countries of the Middle
East. Compare the cases along one of the
questions below (or use one of your own that is
framed in similar terms). Restate the problem in
the question, place each country in relation to
the problem, present a clear argument and develop
it with the support of a major source of data (it
can be statistics, historical data, or peoples
stories). Which theory or theories of those
presented by Ruth Lane and Michael Curtis seem
better suited to account for your problem? Which
theories seem completely wrong instead? (How
much) Can you generalize on your conclusions? How
would you go ahead to put together an empirical
research project on this question? Be selective
in the use of data (use only the data that is
relevant to answer to the question) and include
the sources and references at the end of your
essay (include sources at the end). Discuss
the relationships between globalization and
democratization Does democracy produce economic
wealth, or it is instead wealth that promotes
democracy? In the last three decades,
democratic regimes have expanded dramatically
around the world. Whereas this trend is still
celebrated, there are certain warnings on that
democratization could be in danger. How can we
tell whether democratization is receding or
progressing? Do political parties and party
systems enhance or hinder democracy? Do
political stability and participation oppose to
each other? If political culture frames
political institutions, how much can
institutional reform transform (authoritarian)
political culture? Should we try to intervene to
make culture more democratic everywhere, or it
would be more prudent to leave culture as it is
to avoid unforeseen consequences? Why? What
kind of party systems are best suited to make
democracy thrive? What signs to you would
indicate the need for change when it comes to the
party system? Electoral systems produce
different party systems. So far, we explored the
most popular ones (Single Member District and
Proportional Representation ) plus variants (the
Japanese SNTV) and combinations of the main
systems in different countries. Which system, or
combination, do you find better expresses the
ideals and preservation of a democracy? Why?