Dr. Tabakian’s Political Science 2 Modern World Governments – Fall 2012

Power Point Presentation – August 28th & August 30th

COURSE LECTURE TOPICS

This Week’s Lecture Covers: •Introduction To Course •Syllabus Review •Defining Political Science Elitism Versus Pluralism

•Defining Comparative Politics •Defining Theory •Theories Of Comparative Politics Rational Choice Structural-Functionalism Cultural Approaches

COURSE LECTURE: WEEK #1 (2)

•Spheres Of Influence •Transitional Effects & Stabilization •Power Theory •Transparency – American Exertion Of Power •How Governments Interact With One Another •Reading Assignment For Week #1: Chapter 1 from “Comparative Politics” Review Key Terms For Chapter 1

COMPARATIVE POLITICS TODAY KEY TERMS FOR CHAPTER 1 (1)

1. Democracy 2. Democratization 3. Ethnicity 4. European Union 5. Externalities 6. Governments 7. Gross National Product (GNP) 8. Human Rights 9. Income Inequality 10.Nation 11.Nation-States 12.Oligarchies 13.Political Culture 14.Political System

COMPARATIVE POLITICS TODAY KEY TERMS FOR CHAPTER 1 (2)

15.Public Goods 16.Religious Fundamentalism 17.Sovereignty 18.State 19.State Of Nature 20.Totalitarian Systems 21.United Nations

INTRODUCTION

New semesters bring various hiccups for everyone. This also goes for your instructor. We are all adjusting to new situations, course schedule conflicts and other adjustments. This course utilizes various methods to deliver information. Many of our materials are media driven. You will find many to be humorous, thought provoking , or even interesting. This first clip is presented merely for fun. It is titled “Welcome To School”.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (1)

Instructor: “JP” Tabakian

POLITICAL SCIENCE 2 – MODERN WORLD GOVERNMENTS Sections 1036 (Lecture) & 7986 08/30/20010to 12/19/2010 Lecture: Tuesdays & Thursdays – 11:45AM to 12:30PM – Room TE-401 Office Hours: Tuesday – 11:45AM To 12:30PM Voice Mail: (213) 763-5377 Ext. 4023 E-mail: class@tabakian.com (most reliable way to reach “JP”) URL: www.tabakian.com (use the site to download class material)

*Students with disabilities who need any assistance or accommodations should contact the instructor*

SYLLABUS REVIEW (2) COURSE DESCRIPTION This course studies a selected variety of major national states to secure a comparative picture of political philosophies, constitution, political processes and governmental institutions. Emphasis is placed on how various variables such as the geographic, historic, demographic, and cultural serve to influence various aspects of societal behavior within respective nation-states. The primary goal of this class is to assist students in developing a solid foundation of major methodological and theoretical issues in the field of comparative politics. Students are expected to become able to compare nation-states through the use of various intellectual or conceptual tools of the discipline. Various country studies will be examined that will require careful examination of the politics of Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Russia, China, Mexico, Brazil, Iran, India, Nigeria and The United States.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (3) OUTCOMES AND OBJECTIVES Students will have attained the following tools upon successful completion of this course: • Acquire a strong understanding of how specific combinations of

variables serves to alter societal behavior within a nation-state that in turn influences that government’s foreign and domestic policy. Students will come to understand the following: why compare; how should we compare; and what can or should we compare?

• Come to appreciate how theory helps us understand past events, presently unfolding events and even helps researchers to better predict future outcomes. Properly utilize the major strategies of comparative analysis: the case study, two country comparisons, and multiple-unit comparisons.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (4) OUTCOMES AND OBJECTIVES (CONTINUED) • Gather appropriate research materials during their quest to

produce research based papers that utilize proper methodological approaches that draw on proven theoretical approaches in their comparative analysis. The major theoretical traditions in comparative politics will be utilized throughout the course: rationalist, culturalist and structural approaches.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (5) STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (SLO’s) 1. Analyze government and politics in nation-states through

the use and interplay of political institutions and processes, public policy, state and non-state actors, and domestic and international issues.

2. Analyze the relationships between the economy and political system for a given country.

3. Analyze how different kinds of government and political institutions affect both domestic and foreign policies for a given country.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (6) REQUIRED TEXTBOOKS The following textbook is required. Students are advised to complete assigned readings prior to attending class.

“Comparative Politics Today: A World View, 9th Edition” By: Gabriel A. Almond, Russell and G. Bingham Powell Jr.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (7) ARTICLES Articles may be assigned for students to review. They are made available on our supplemental Moodle course site. Students may receive hardcopies in class depending on the nature of our scheduled discussion.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (8) SUPPLEMENTAL TEXT The following text is optional. It is available on our course website at: www.tabakian.com in the publication section. Other interesting texts are also made available for students to enjoy.

“Transparency: American Power In The 21st Century” covers many of the points made by your instructor during lecture.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (9) ASSIGNMENTS Two essay assignments, three in class quizzes, one research paper, AND ONE FINAL EXAM will serve as the assignments. ALL IN CLASS QUIZZES, INCLUDING THE FINAL ARE OPEN NOTES, BUT CLOSED BOOK. Students are advised to take notes both during lecture AND while reviewing assigned readings outside of class. Students are given 60 minutes to complete their quizzes. One of the three in class quizzes, the lowest scored quiz, will be thrown out. There will be no makeup quizzes. If a student misses a quiz then that will be the one dropped. STUDENTS MUST BRING THEIR OWN SCANTRON AND #2 PENCIL. NOTE: Online students will take all exams online through the Moodle system.

SYLLABUS REVIEW (10) ATTENDANCE Students are required to attend class. Attendance is taken during every class session. Repeated unexcused absences may lead a student to be dropped or face a reduction in grade due to nonparticipation. Lecture discussions are to be addressed in the research paper. Be sure to contact your instructor if you are going to be absent. It is the responsibility of students to formally drop classes. Your instructor is not responsible for dropping anyone.

DEFINING POLITICAL SCIENCE? Political Science is a branch of the Social Sciences like Sociology. Both fields are fairly similar as each is primarily interested in individual as well as group behavior. Their fundamental difference is exhibited by what theory serves as the foundation for each respective discipline. Social scientists are biased towards elitism while political scientists are prone to pluralism. This does not mean that elite theory is not utilized in the political sciences. It is recognized, but only in contrast with pluralism. Both theories compliment each other, but pluralism is generally favored by political scientists. Political scientists examine how political behavior is influenced as Sociology, which looks at individual behavior that is determined according to elite influence in general. Elite theory serves as the primary basis of the social sciences (sociology) while political scientists are biased towards pluralism or the result of competing interests and the end result of conflict and compromise.

ELITISM

Elitism does not promote elite rule. It merely helps us to understand how the rules of a society, especially a democratic one, may actually obstruct the social progress of the masses. Elitism argues that elites are needed, due to the ignorance of the masses and their unwillingness to act responsibly. One thing that elites are particularly fearful of is the tendency for masses to be vulnerable to demagogic appeals. Demagogues or counter elites are mass-oriented leaders who express outright hostility toward established order and appeal to the mass sentiments. This can be from the far left or far right. This also helps to explain why domestic elites remain fearful of direct democracy and why the Founding Fathers were against the establishment of national referenda.

ELITISM SUMMARIZED (1) 1. Society is divided between the powerful few

and the majority weak. 2. Governing few are not typical of the governed

masses. Elites are not drawn mostly from the upper class socioeconomic section of society.

3. Non-elites have to be given the opportunity to rise up to elite positions. The masses have to believe that the process is continuous or revolution may occur. Barriers prevent finite elite positions from being overtaken by unqualified individuals. This is a classic rat and cheese scenario.

Sufficient Cheese Sufficient Cheese Lack Of Cheese

ELITISM SUMMARIZED (2) 4. Elites share a common belief on the basic

values of the elite. Any change of public policy will be incrementally slow rather than revolutionary.

5. Elities may base their actions either on narrow, self-serving motives and risk undermining mass support, or they may initiate reforms, curb abuse, and undertake public-regarding programs to preserve the system.

6. Active elites are not typically influenced from apathetic masses. Elites influence masses more than the masses influence elites.

Sufficient Cheese Sufficient Cheese Lack Of Cheese

ELITISM – HOW INFORMATION FLOWS Elite theory also argues that information flows from opinion elites down to opinion leaders who are looked to the public for information. News is first “created” by opinion elites and then sent to opinion leaders to help disseminate the information. Those at the very top of the elite network decide what information is deemed as necessary to offer society. These elites may be news makers themselves or in charge of large media corporations. Opinion leaders may be thought of as journalists, news anchors, expert pundits or even celebrities who possess legitimacy among those in society.

PLURALISM SUMMARIZED (1)

1. Society is divided into numerous groups with all making demands on government while none of the participants are able to dominate all decision-making.

2. Citizens do not directly participate in decision-making, but they are able to vote for leaders to make decisions through a process of bargaining, accommodation, and compromise.

3. Competition among leadership groups helps protect individuals’ interests. Countervailing centers of power – for example, competition among business leaders, labor leaders and government leaders – can check one another and keep each interest from abusing its power and oppressing the individual. Each of these individual “spheres of influence” allies themselves with other spheres that possess similar goals. See “Spheres Of Influence”.

PLURALISM SUMMARIZED (2)

4. Individuals may not participate directly in decision-making, but they can exert influence through active participation in organized groups, political parties and elections.

PLURALISM – SPHERES Pluralism insures that groups are restricted from single handedly influencing public policy. Rather, cross-cutting cleavages would form, as groups seek compromise with others to build coalitions that would succeed in affecting change. This helps to assure that minority factions are protected from an overwhelming majority. Majority power-holders among the “Spheres of Influence” are essentially “checked” by the formation of cross-cutting cleavages in an effort to balance against overwhelming forces

ELITISM VERSUS PLURALISM (1) Comparing and contrasting elitism and pluralism allows us to observe how they differ:

1. Elitism asserts that the most important division in society is between elites and masses.

2. Elitism emphasizes the importance to leaders to maintain their position of power – Pluralism emphasizes this devotion to their group interests.

3. Elitism asserts that mass membership of organizations rarely exercises influence on elite leadership. That these organizations have no democratic processes and are controlled by leaders who operate for their own self-interest. Pluralists offer no evidence that the giant organizations represent the interests of their individual members.

ELITISM VERSUS PLURALISM (2) 4. Elitism takes into account of all power holders – private and

public. Pluralism focuses on governmental leaders and those who interact directly with them.

5. Elitism emphasizes shared characteristics of leaders on top of their interest in preserving the social diversity among leaders, differences in backgrounds, ideologies, and viewpoints. Pluralism also argues that decisions made by leaders are a product of their role perception, institutional constraints, interest group pressure, public opinion, etc. Elitism focuses on leadership consensus – Pluralism focuses on elite conflict.

DEFINING COMPARATIVE POLITICS (1)

Comparative politics inspires students to establish linkages between international relations with domestic politics. Structural-functionalist approaches had failed to recognize the interactions between international and domestic issues. Comparative politics deals with complex systems issues that can include comparing capitalism to communism, democracy to totalitarianism, free markets to planned economies, etc. Scholars saw many avenues open to comparison from the 1960s to 1970s when comparative analysis started to take notice. Nothing seemed to be beyond these scholars as they pursued every conceivable option including democracy, authoritarianism, Marxism, revolution, corporatism, totalitarianism, fragmentation, disintegration, and civil war.

DEFINING COMPARATIVE POLITICS (2)

Comparing to control is perhaps the major point of interest for students as it relates to case studies. Control means to test our hypothesis. An example would be a claim that “Democracy cannot be imposed on society by an external power.” How do we know if this is a strong or weak claim? The first thing to do is look for other cases where democracy has been imposed on another society. Looking at two cases like Germany and Japan after World War II reveals that we may need to adjust our main thesis statement. This is why it is a good idea to look at even more cases to evaluate the strength of our argument. Though we cannot ignore any evidence, we can explain why different results occurred.

DEFINING COMPARATIVE POLITICS (3)

Comparative Politics used to be focused mainly on Western Europe until the Cold War compelled American policymakers to pay attention to “lesser” countries, regions and former colonies. The concern was that these countries represented either future enemies or allies. This concern propelled American policymakers to learn more about these countries. Cases are usually based on a specific issue or concern like industrialization, social revolution, terrorism, democracy, or any other issue of interest. They are also delimited graphically as time can be a focal point of analysis.

COMPARATIVE POLITICS THEORIES (1)

Comparative Politics Possesses three main theories:

1. Rational Choice

2. Structural Analysis

3. Cultural Approaches

Rational Choice Analysis: This theory argues that self-interests guides all behavior, which involved conducting a cost benefit analysis. Individuals weigh the cost along with the benefits and then decide to pursue something if the benefits outweigh the costs. If we assume that everyone basis their actions on self-interest then we have to come to terms with situations involving actions that are not beneficial. This depends on the quality of information one has been able to accrue.

COMPARATIVE POLITICS THEORIES (2)

Decision makers rarely have access to perfect information, as they simply don’t possess viable access to the information required to make a rational decision. This includes a lack of experience, limited data, lack of education, inability to assess actions of others, lack of knowing future developments, or even just bad luck. Strategic interaction also comes into play, which is the implication that indecisions made by one individual is made according to decisions made by others, which leads us to game theory. Prisoner’s dilemma is one aspect of strategic interaction.

COMPARATIVE POLITICS THEORIES (3)

Structural-Functionalism: This theory utilizes micro-interpretation to suggest that given the issue, individuals may unite temporarily to defend its interests. Structural-functionalism helps to explain how political leaders can deal with citizen demands that are hard to fulfill. Instead of providing the actual goods sought, political leaders may instill loyalty based on symbolic or cultural goods. The structural-functional approach maintains two points: 1. In different countries, the same structure may perform

different functions. 2. Absolute power is impossible and no one institution, or

individual entity, no matter how powerful, may be able to control all facets in society.

COMPARATIVE POLITICS THEORIES (4)

Culturalist Approaches: This theory is likely to accept the arguments of rational choice or structural analysis as both are seen as helping to construct societal norms. Culturalism begins with the premise that culture matters in any explanation. It is important not to state grand assumptions when using culture as a variable. For example, statements like “Muslim countries are resistant to democracy,” or “Confucianism helps explain capitalist development in East Asia” are not appropriate. The problem with these claims is that it represents a decontextualized generalization that portrays culture as clear-cut, uniform, and basically static. The majority of Culturalists would argue today that culture is multi-vocal and multidimensional.

ROLE OF THEORY Everyone uses theory whether they know it or not. Many of us devise our own theories through our childhood socializations up to adulthood. Disagreements within the field of political science for example come about when there is no agreement over the basic forces that shape the discipline. Students become disillusioned when situations arise that sweep forecasts into the abyss. Elitism and Pluralism serve as the foundation for the social sciences with political science being more inclined to adhere to pluralist arguments. Readers are encouraged to utilize both theories throughout the text. This will assist students of the political sciences to critically analyze those arguments presented by the author in order to devise their own methodologies concerning political science. Theory also helps researches to classify certain variables. It may be thought of as a pair of sunglasses that helps us filter unwanted information.

EXAMPLE OF THEORY - REALISM Realism accords that as human nature remains the predominant factor in a nation-state’s foreign policy, it is further determined that such policies are focused upon self-interest. As the inherent motive for man is survival, it applies to the applied foreign policies of nation-states

for the actions of a state are determined according to the tenets of political determination. Considered to be a synonym for power politics, though at times construed as pragmatic and wrought with simplicity, it is a somewhat abrupt philosophy focused on the inherent evils of mankind. Let us look at a clip from the movie “Failsafe”. Walter Matthau plays the role of National Security Advisor who applies rational choice and realist theory to explain why striking at the Soviet Union is necessary to survive.

RATIONAL CHOICE (1) What is the primary goal of the individual? The answer may be summed up in one word: Survival. This basic human requirement serves as the foundation for all action. If survival is the ultimate goal, then one must assume that individual parties are determined to make decisions that are based on rationality. This of course assumes that people as individual units will base all decisions on self-interest. Let us even assume that the decision maker is in possession of perfect information. Why then do people make irrational or even foolhardy decisions even when all signs point to negative or even disastrous results? The answer is simply that human beings are not robots or computers. We are fallible to emotions that encompass belief systems like religion that in turn are great influences over individual behavior.

RATIONAL CHOICE (2) Decisions are based on self-interest…as we define our self-interest to be. Consider this example. We have a nun and a real-estate mogul. The nun gives up all her worldly possessions and dedicating herself to helping those in poverty. Her justification may be great rewards in the afterlife. The real-estate mogul does not believe in an afterlife, but does believe in making as much money as possible, spending it all on an overly extravagant and abusive lifestyle. Who is acting rationally? Both individuals are for they are fulfilling their self-interest…as they define their self-interest to be.

SPHERES OF INFLUENCE (1) Pluralism is best in describing how competing spheres of influence protect minority rights against majority factions. These majority factions may consist of individual powerful elite entities or groups of “spheres of influence”. Alliances will form among once competing spheres in order to “check” another sphere or individual elite base that acquires too much power. This constant “checking” as described in the “competing spheres of influence” diagram describes how this plays out in all systems. Individual spheres of influence are always on the alert for one of their peers assuming too much power.

SPHERES OF INFLUENCE (2) Spheres consist of individuals who share a common set of interests and/or belief systems. Individual participants are the absolute micro-level of every sphere. Here are some examples of spheres: family, work, school, political parties, and religion. Different spheres of influence communicate with one another through the individual who is a member of those same spheres. Various societal interactions influence individual behavior.

COMPETING SPHERES Competing Spheres of Influence essentially check each other within the political system. This is seen as essential for the protection of minority rights especially as it pertains to majority factions. Elites in our society are not defined according to race, gender, religion, etc. They are seen mainly as those who hold positions of power with society. Our Founding Fathers considered the protection of minority rights as those few individuals who retained control over society. These individuals were property holders, policy makers or those who possessed positions of power.

TRANSITIONAL EFFECTS (1) Competition among spheres of interest produces great returns for humanity. The constant strive for marketplace acceptance has resulted in America progressing from a predominantly agricultural society to an industrial, nuclear, and information based society. The United States is unique in that it excels in more than one particular capitalist endeavor. Innovation has led to advancements that have greatly influenced every aspect of society. Society has benefited from constant advancements in energy harvesting, computers, communication, water purification, medicine and all other areas not listed for the list would be enormous.

TRANSITIONAL EFFECTS (2) Every significant discovery has in turn greatly influenced societal norms of behavior. Masses today view internet communications as a vital necessity. It is nearly impossible to operate in a complex society without easy access to the web. The majority of masses did not have this belief fifteen years ago. Only society determining that the internet allowed for greater efficiency was it adopted as a societal norm. Those not willing to adapt became obsolete.

STABILIZATION Sudden instability is the greatest threat to humanity for it threatens to cause irreparable harm to the individual. One may never consider harming another person in a state of nature. Elimination of one’s sustenance throws the individual into a state of war, because their survival is now threatened. Nation-states consist of multiple spheres of interest in turn consisting of individual units consisting of people. As survival is the primary goal of man, so it is the ultimate pursuit of nation-states. The primary concern is that of stability. This philosophy has prevented a major war from taking place over the last sixty years. Instability is the primary cause of all conflict both within and between nation-states.

POWER THEORY (1) To exert power one must first possess adequate reserves to draw upon. This is defined simply as “capacity of power”. Achieving higher positions is dependent on various factors that may include: education; wealth; profession; charisma and other talents either developed or engrained from birth. This “capacity of power” is not determined according to a single resource, ability or possession. It is instead a combination of different variables that serve to make up the individual. This is just like a battery consisting of energy resources drawn upon when it comes time to draw power in order to achieve a set objective. Just like a battery powering a flashlight so does one’s individual “capacity of power” serve to assist one in achieving a set goal or in this case influencing or affecting political behavior to maintain, expand or protect one’s standing in order to survive in society.

POWER THEORY (2) Our example of “capacity of power” is applicable to individual capacity of power and all associations up to the nation state as all combined units consist of individuals pursuing their set of priorities or self-interest that is in turn based on survival. Drawing upon these reserves allows one to pursue agendas of self-interest. Power is the ultimate pursuit, as the ultimate goal of humanity is survival. Individual participants in pursuit of these goals join together in common pursuits under the umbrella of common interest. These resulting “spheres of interest” in turn join under broader umbrellas that also offer another distinct set of common goals that in turn competes with respective peers.

POWER THEORY (3) Power equals resources (capacity of power) times compliance squared, divided by force. Every accounting of power theory is taken into consideration in the construction of this formula. We have explored the contention that the pursuit of self-interest encourages man to engage in political behavior. This serves as the foundation for rational choice theory, which in turn has led us to power theory. One may argue that the pursuit of power maintains the never ending cycle of political: conflict; compromise; alliances; and wars.

POWER THEORY (4) Many have countered this argument with a direct assault on the statement that “there is no morality in politics”. These critics are both right and wrong. It is true that morality has no direct correlation with political science if the pursuit of self-interests and power resources maintains utmost priority. On the other hand they may be correct if one party sells their pursuit as a moral cause in order to achieve their agenda. For example, one may argue that good may come from conflict even if it leads to the destruction of a nation-state and the slaughtering of thousands or millions of people if the seed of democracy is planted and nurtured to maturity.

TRANSPARENCY (1) America has grown from the days of a colony to major power, superpower, and hegemon, to its present empire status. American power is felt throughout the international community. Playing poker requires one to adopt what is commonly known as a “poker face”. Players will hide their true emotions, even faking their true intentions to catch other players off guard. Some have even taken to wearing sunglasses. The exact opposite tactic that the United States has adopted is “Transparency”. This involves disclosing all routes the nation-state will undertake with regards to all forms of public policy pertaining to its political, economic and military strategies.

TRANSPARENCY (2) Alexander Hamilton initiated this policy as the chief financial philosopher of the United States even if he did not coin the term. Hamilton is regarded as the chief architect of our economic policy, which in turn was developed in order to win the confidence of domestic US business and financial elites as well as gaining the confidence of international business.

TRANSPARENCY EXAMPLE #1 America possesses the most technologically advanced military hardware. This video demonstrates one of the first deployable force fields for light armored vehicles (LAVs). Welcome to the 21st Century.

TRANSPARENCY EXAMPLE #2 America is not the only nation that utilizes Transparency. This video shows the Israeli Defense Force demonstrating a new type of gun that can shoot around corners. A brief interview with the inventor of this amazing weapon follows the demonstration.

TRANSPARENCY EXAMPLE #3 Some forms of transparency are both political and military in nature. The military sponsored the development of the Massive Ordinance Aerial Burst (MOAB). It is commonly referred to as “The Mother Of All Bombs”. It is the largest conventional bomb in our arsenal. There is a psychological component to this bomb. A mushroom cloud forms following successful detonation. It looks somewhat like a nuclear device being detonated.

TRANSPARENCY EXAMPLE #4 Javelin is a fire-and-forget missile with lock-on before launch and automatic self-guidance. The system takes a top-attack flight profile against armored vehicles (attacking the top armor which is generally thinner) but can also take a direct-attack mode for use against buildings or fortifications. This missile also has the ability to engage helicopters. Javelin is supplied by Raytheon/Lockheed Martin's JAVELIN Joint Venture.