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

Power Point Presentation – September 4th & September 6th

COURSE LECTURE TOPICS

This Week’s Lecture Covers: •Why And How We Compare •Most Similar Systems & Most Different Systems •Political System Formation Political Systems & Their Environments Structures & Functions Policy Performance & Consequences

•Approaches To Comparing Rational Structural-Functionalism Cultural

COURSE LECTURE: WEEK #2 (2)

•The Policy Level Performance Outcome Education

•Globalization World Capitalist Economy Power Of Technology Interdependency & Peaceful Relations

•International Relations Versus Comparative Politics Future Of Comparative Politics Future Of International Relations Will Both Schools Merge?

COURSE LECTURE: WEEK #2 (3)

Reading Assignments For Week #2 •Textbook: “Comparative Politics Today” Chapter 2 From “Comparative Politics Today” Review Key Terms For Chapter 2

•Course Pack Article: “The Future In Comparative Politics” By: Robert H. Bates

COMPARATIVE POLITICS TODAY KEY TERMS FOR CHAPTER 2 (1)

1. Distribution 2. Environment 3. Extraction 4. Functions 5. Globalization 6. Governments 7. Inputs 8. Interdependence 9. Interest Aggregation 10. Interest Articulation 11.Outcomes 12.Outputs 13.Policy Adjudication 14.Policy Implementation

COMPARATIVE POLITICS TODAY KEY TERMS FOR CHAPTER 2 (2)

14.Policy Level 15.Policymaking 16.Political Culture 17.Political Communication 18.Political Recruitment 19.Political Socialization 20.Political System 21.Process Functions 22.Regulation 23.Structural Functional Approach 24.Structures 25.System 26.System Functions

WHY WE COMPARE

We compare to accomplish the following: 1. Compare to control. This is done in order to see if our

claims hold merit. Our arguments may be about social, political, or economic phenomena.

2. To understand and explain. Understanding means one is interested primarily on one case. The researcher will draw from various cases and theories to learn more about the case of interest. Explaining requires comparison while understanding that the world is not a controlled laboratory. Theories help us on our quest for truth.

HOW WE COMPARE: MSS & MDS

The two basic comparative strategies are called the Most Similar Systems (MSS) and Most Different Systems (MDS) Design. •MSS: Find key differences between two similar systems. •MDS: Find key similarities between two or more dissimilar systems.

MOST SIMILAR SYSTEMS DESIGN (1)

MOST SIMILAR SYSTEMS (MSS) is based on comparing two or more social systems that are similar. It is important to understand that researchers must compare two more systems that possess a large number of commonalities, but also differ in some areas. At least two of the cases should possess an independent variable and dependent variable that are different.

MOST SIMILAR SYSTEMS DESIGN (2)

Dependent Versus Independent Variables Independent variables affect the dependent

variable or the outcome itself. Let us look at this statement: “Democracy can only take root in

capitalist societies”.

Dependent Variable: Democracy.

Independent Variable: Capitalist Societies.

MOST DIFFERENT SYSTEMS DESIGN

MOST DIFFERENT SYSTEMS The key difference between MDS and MSS is that in an MDS design, the dependent variable should

be the same for all chosen cases. Identify the different independent variable(s) to make your

case. Theory comes in very handy when summing up your arguments.

POLITICAL SYSTEMS ENVIRONMENT AND INTERDEPENDENCE (1)

• To utilize a structural-functional systems framework to compare political systems we need to discuss three general concepts: – System: suggests an object having interdependent

parts, acting within a setting or an environment – Structure – Function

• Political system: a set of institutions and agencies concerned with formulating and implementing the collective goals of a society or of groups within it.

POLITICAL SYSTEMS ENVIRONMENT AND INTERDEPENDENCE (2)

• Governments are the policymaking parts of political systems. – Decisions of governments are normally backed up by legitimate

coercion; obedience may be compelled. • A political system exists in both an international environment and a

domestic environment. • A system receives inputs from these environments.

– International • Exchanges among countries may vary in many ways: small

to great. • Interdependence has increased enormously in the last

decades. – Globalization

– Domestic • Economic and social systems • Political culture of its citizens

POLITICAL SYSTEMS STRUCTURES AND FUNCTIONS (1)

• Structures: parliaments, bureaucracies, administrative agencies, and courts

• Structures perform functions, which in turn enable the government to formulate, implement, and enforce its policies. – Policies reflect the goals; the agencies provide the means. – Six types of political structures: political parties, interest groups,

legislatures, executives, bureaucracies, and courts. • Formal organizations engaged in political activities. • Some structures, such as ruling military councils or governing

royal families, are found in only a few countries. • Similar structures may have very different functions across

political systems. – Example: China and Britain

POLITICAL SYSTEMS STRUCTURES AND FUNCTIONS (2)

• Three additional functions which are not directly involved in making and implementing public policy - socialization, recruitment, and communication, are fundamentally important.

• These are SYSTEM functions. – They determine whether or not the system will be maintained or

changed. • Political socialization: involves families, schools,

communications media, churches, and all the various political structures that develop, reinforce and transform the political culture, the attitudes of political significance in the society

• Political recruitment: refers to the selection of people for political activity and government offices

• Political communication: refers to the flow of information through the society and through the various structures that make up the political system

POLITICAL SYSTEMS STRUCTURES AND FUNCTIONS (3)

• Outputs = the implementations of the political process. – Substantive impacts on the society, the economy, and the

culture – Regulation of behavior; extraction of resources;

distribution of benefits and services – Reflect the way the policies interact with the domestic

and international environments • Example of structures and functions in Russia before and

after the breakdown of communist rule in the Soviet Union – Approach - structural functional comparison

• Allows us to examine how the same functions are performed in different countries, or in the same country at two different points in time

POLITICAL SYSTEMS STRUCTURES AND FUNCTIONS (4)

• Process functions are performed by political structures. • The structural-functional approach stresses two points:

– In different countries, the same structure may perform different functions.

– While a particular institution may have a special relationship to a particular function, institutions often do not have a monopoly on any one function.

• Ex: Presidents and governors may share in the policy-making function (veto powers), as do the higher courts (judicial review).

RATIONAL CHOICE (1)

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.

RATIONAL CHOICE (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.

STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONALISM

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.

CULTURAL APPROACHES

Cultural 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 generalizes culture as clear-cut, uniform, and basically static. The majority of Culturalists would argue today that culture is multi-vocal and multidimensional.

STATE INTERDEPENDENCY (1)

Societal interdependence addresses situation in which events within one society affect events in another. Government involvement in instigating these events does not have to take place for this to occur. Transnational relations helps to encourage interdependency between states. States interdependent on one another presents each with economic and political trade-offs, whereas gains in one may lead to the weakening of another. One may argue that an interdependent world of liberal-democratic states can at some point in time lead to world peace. Adopting current rules of the game, even among nation-states that may not be democratic, does present a situation where the success and or survival of one country is dependent on the success and or survival of its peer.

STATE INTERDEPENDENCY (2)

Societal and economic interdependence can interlink the domestic policies of two nation-state. Take the example of Canada and the United States. The high degree of societal interdependence assures that Canada will be strongly affected by American policies. The most powerful nation-state can more affect the policies of another country interdependent on its society as this example shows. Underlying most analyses of world politics and international organizations is the state-centric approach:

1. Governments are the most significant actors in world politics.

2. Governments are unified actors.

PREVENTING A MAJOR WAR Interdependent linkages among nation-states results in the trade of products, services, ideas, culture, etc. The greatest advantage of this global trade is not just cheap merchandise for our people. Many argue we have not had a major war for over 60 years thanks to complex interdependency. Some students may believe that Persian Gulf War I & 2 is a major war. That is inaccurate, for a major war results when at least two major powers attack each other. The result would be millions dead in less than an hour. Watch this video presentation of America nuclear weapon tests. Ask yourself this question, “Why does the United States not use these weapons?”

GLOBALIZATION (1) Globalization is a process that seems to create a more unified world united in a single economic system. Globalization continues to be cited as a cause for the withering away of the state. Technology has allowed mankind to realize globalization. Liberalism and its market-based order continue to be the primary motivator for technological innovation that in turn has rendered previous norms obsolete. One can argue that this constant drive may in time render international strife, conflict and other assorted calamities obsolete. Liberals would argue that globalization is a trend toward the transformation of world politics with states no longer remaining sealed units.

GLOBALIZATION (2) Globalization may be seen as a homogenization process that equalizes prices, products, wages, wealth, rates of interest and profit margins. It is a movement that can spark resistance both within the United States as well as around the world. This can come from religious fundamentalists, labor unions and other types of special interest groups. Globalization has so far only encompassed western countries, Israel and certain Asian countries like Japan, South Korea and China. Most of the world has been left out, including Africa, Latin America, Russia, Middle East and swaths of Asia.

GLOBALIZATION (3) This political piece explores the effects of globalization. One can argue that globalization has extended people’s buying power. Dollars can be stretched must further thanks to lower labor costs found in distant lands. “Big Box-Mart” argues that cheap goods does present a serious side effect. Does the message relate to your personal belief about our present global economy?

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.

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (1)

International Relations focuses mainly on conflict in the world system and how to prevent chaos from ensuing by managing power relations through the use of deterrence. Foreign policy decision makers examine problems by equating five variables:

(1) the societal and individual values of their state and that of the case being examined;

(2) their own and the world’s understanding of the problem at hand;

(3) those capabilities available on hand and what the goals of their nation in correlation to other nations;

(4) the bureaucratic and organizational framework where decisions affecting foreign affairs are constructed; and

(5) how that individual defines the international system, whether it may be bipolar, multipolar, classical balance of power, unilateral, etc.

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (2)

International relations is like the philosophy of science as both are defined as, “a symbolic construction, a series of inter-related constructs or concepts, together with definitions, laws, theorems and axioms.” The field of study came about following World War I by those who sought to understand what causes conflict so that the barrage of conflict may not be repeated again. The field consists of contending theories that some have argued has not been able to reign uncontested. One can argue that the field as a whole is wrought with contesting theoretical approaches, which have yet to achieve recognition as a new paradigm or standing as a law that all researchers can depend on. Found within the natural sciences are certain laws retaining equal standing among researchers in that field. None of the subfields of IR or the entire discipline for that matter have yet achieved this state. All of the competing theoretical approaches and methodologies applied in IR depend on each other to form a nucleus of knowledge that researchers may utilize in different configurations to strengthen or attack hypotheses.

COMPARATIVE JOINING WITH IR?

Domestic politics may influence foreign relations, which in turn may influence the domestic politics of a respective nation-state. Existing linkages have been found to exist between external and internal factors. External factors like security threats may affect a state’s economy. This is why students may discover that boundaries are evaporating between international relations, which looks at how the external actions of an actor affects those actions undertaken by another actor.