Topics|Soc. Cleavages|Pol. Culture|Pol. Frameworks|Pol. Change|Trends|Key Terms

BASICS

the topics

The Major Topics:

• The Comparative Method
• The Sources of Public Authority and Political Power
• Society and Politics
• Citizen and State
• Political Framework
• Political Change
• Comparative Examination

Who has political power? Who has the authority to rule? Different countries answer these questions in different ways, but they all answer them in one way or another. Countries that have no clear answers often suffer from lack of political legitimacy - or the right to rule, as determined by their own citizens.

• Legitimacy may be secured in a number of ways, using sources such as social impacts, constitutions, and ideologies.
• Historical evolution of political traditions shape a country's concept of who has the authority to rule and its definition of legitimate political power. This evolution may be gradual or forced, long or relatively brief, and the relative importance of tradition varies from country to country.
• Political culture refers to the collection of political beliefs, values, practices, and institutions that the government is based on. For example, if a society values individualism, the government will generally reflect this value in the way that it is structured and in the way that it operates. If the government does not reflect basic political values of a people, it will have difficulty remaining viable.

social cleavages

Government and politics are only part of the many facets of a complex society. Religion, ethnic groups, races, urban and rural life, social and economic classes all interact with the political system and have a tremendous impact on policymaking. The divisions - theoretically out of the realm of politics - are called social cleavages.

• Bases of social cleavages - What mix of social classes, ethnic and racial groups, religions, languages does a country have? How deep are these cleavages, and to what degree do they separate people from one another (form social boundaries)? Which of these cleavages appear to have the most significant impact on the political system?
• Cleavages and political institutions - How are the cleavages expressed in the political system? For example, is political party membership based on cleavages? Do political elites usually come from one group or another? Do these cleavages block some groups from fully participating in government?

political culture

The term "state" refers to the governmental structure of a nation - a group of people cuturally and psychology tied together. Governments connect to their citizens in a variety of ways, but we may successfully compare government-citizen relationships by categorizing, and in turn noting differences and similarities among categories. For example, citizens within democracies generally relate to their governments differently than do citizens that are governed by authoritarian rulers. Or, different countries may be compared by using the categories below:

• Attitudes and beliefs of citizens - Do citizens trust their government? Do they believe that the government cares about what they think? Do citizens feel that government affects their lives in any significant ways?
• Political Socialization - How do citizens learn about politics in their country? Does electronic and print media shape their learning? Does the government put forth effort to politically educate their citizens? If so, how much of their effot might you call "propaganda"? How do children learn about politics?
• Voting behavior - Do citizens in the country have regular elections? If so, are the elections truly competitive? If not, what is the purpose of the elections? What citizens are eligible to vote, and how many actually vote? Do politicians pay attention to elections, and do elections affect policymaking?

political frameworks

An important part of studying comparative government and politics is developing an understanding of political frameworks - various types of regimes, the ways that governmental institutions function, and the international environment that systems functions in.

• Types of regimes - Regimes endure beyond individual governments and leaders. We refer to a regime when a country's institutions and practices carry over across time, even though leaders and particular issues change. Regimes may be compared by using these categories:

1. Democracies - These political systems base their authority on the will of the people. Democracies may be indirect, with elected officials representing the people, or they may be direct, when individuals have immediate say over many decisions that the government makes. Most democracies are indirect, mainly because large populations make it almost impossible for individuals to have a great deal of direct influence on how they are governed. Some democracies are parliamentary systems - where citizens vote for the legislative representatives and for the executive branch leaders. Democratic governments vary in the degree to which they regulate/control the economy, but businesses, corporations, and/or companies generally operate somewhat independently from the government.
2. Authoritarian regimes - In this type of regime, decisions are made by political elites - those that hold political power - without much input from citizens. These regimes may be ruled by a single dictator, an hereditary monarch, a small group of of aristocrats, or a single political party. The economy is generally tightly controlled by the political elite. Some authoritarian regimes are based on communism, a theory developed in the 19th century by Karl Marx and altered in the 20th century by Vladimir Lenin. In these regimes, the communist party controls everything from the government to the economy to social life. Otheres practice corporatism - an arrangement in which government officials interact with people/groups outside the government before they set policy. The outside contacts are generally business and labor leaders, or they may be heads of huge patron-client systems that provide reciprocal favors and services to their supporters.

• The scope of government activity - How much and what kinds of power does a government have? How deeply does it affect its citizens' lives, and how much control does it have over the economy? Democratic governments ultimately rest on the will of the people, but they still may have a wide scope of activities that firmly steer the nation's course. On the other hand, authoritarian governments may have little impact on their citizens' lives and/or the economy because their institutions lack strength.
• The institutions of national government – All political systems establish institutions – structures that carry out the work of governing. Some governments have much more elaborate structures than others, but they often have similarities across cultures. However, just because you see the same type of institution in two different countries, don’t assume that they serve the same functions for the political system. For example, a legislature in one country may have a great deal more power than a comparable structure in another country. Only by studying the way that the structures operate and the functions they fill will you be able to compare them accurately. Common structures that exist in most countries are legislatures, executives, judicial systems, bureaucracies, and armies.
• Linkage Institutions – In many countries we may identify groups that connect the government to its citizens, such as political parties, interest groups, and print and electronic media. Appropriately, these groups are called linkage institutions. Their size and development depends partly on the size of the population, and partly on the scope of government activity. The larger the population, and the more complex the government’s policymaking activities, the more likely the country is to have well developed linkage institutions.
• International and regional environments – All political systems exist within an environment that is affected by other governments. Some have more international and/or regional contacts than others, but most countries in the world today must cope with influences from the outside and interactions with others. In the 20th century, many national governments established relationships with regional organizations such as NATO, the European Union, NAFTA, OPEC, and with international organizations such as the United Nations. These organizations reflect a strong tendency toward globalization – an integration of social, environmental, economic, and cultural activities of nations that has resulted from increasing international contacts. On the other hand, many political scientists point out a counter trend – fragmentation – a tendency for people to base their loyalty on ethnicity, language, religion, or cultural identity. Although globalization and fragmentation appear to be opposite concepts, they both transcend political boundaries between individual countries.
• Political elites – All countries have political elites, or leaders that have a disproportionate share of policymaking power. In democracies, these people are selected by competitive elections, but they still may be readily identified as political elites. Every country must establish a method of elite recruitment, or ways to identify and select people for future positions. Also, countries must be concerned about leadership succession, or the process that determines the procedure for replacing leaders when they resign, die, or are no longer effective.

political change

Political systems change over time for many different reasons. The governments may initiate change, but often it is caused by outside forces. The change may have economic roots, as when a country makes a transition between agriculture and industry. Change may also occur with an inflow of immigrants or by migration of people out of a country’s borders. Change also takes many forms, sometimes happening little by little, and sometimes very abruptly. Comparatives are interested not only in the causes and forms of change, but also in the various impacts that it has on the policymaking process.

• Sources of political change – Factors include industrialization, urbanization, economic crisis, international economy, foreign invasions, and diffusion of new ideas and ideologies.
• The nature of political change – The existence of regimes implies continuity, but internal and/or external factors may bring about change of regime, sometimes by nonviolent, evolutionary means, but sometimes by violent revolution. For example, a country that functioned for many years under a monarchy may find that the political system no longer functions well once industrialization takes place. So, economic changes may lead to regime changes, often to a democratic form of government.
• Nationalism – For more than 200 years now, national borders ideally have been drawn along the lines of group identity. For example, people within one area think of themselves as “French,” and people in another area think of themselves as “English.” Even though individual differences exist within nations, the nation provides the overriding identity for most of its citizens. However, the concept has always been problematic – as when “Armenians” live inside the borders of a country called “Azerbaijan.” Especially now that globalization and fragmentation provide counter trends, the nature of nationalism and its impact of policy making are clearly changing.
• The consequences of political change – Political change may have many consequences, including redistribution of land, change in ownership of means of production, circulation of elites, changing nature of citizen participation, different party systems, and the acquisition and/or loss of citizen rights.

Three Trends

In comparing political systems, it is important to take notice of overall patters of development that affect everyone in the contemporary world. Two of these trends; democratization and the move towards market economies, indicate growing commonalities (or globalization) among nations, and the third represents fragmentation – the revival of ethnic or cultural politics.

1) Democratization
Even though democracy takes many different forms, more and more nations are turning toward some form of popular government. One broad, essential requirement for democracy is the existence of competitive elections that are regular, free, and fair. In other words, the election offers a real possibility that the incumbent government may be defeated. By this standard, a number of modern states that call themselves “democracies” fall into a gray area that is neither clearly democratic nor clearly undemocratic. Examples are Russia, Nigeria, and Indonesia. In contrast, liberal democracies display other democratic characteristics beyond having competitive elections:

• Civil liberties, such as freedom of belief, speech, and assembly
• Rule of law that provides for equal treatment of citizens and due process
• Neutrality of the judiciary and other checks on the abuse of power
• Open civil society that allows citizens to lead private lives and mass media to operate independently from government
• Civilian control of the military

According to political scientist Samuel Huntington, the modern world is now in a “third wave” of democratization that began during the 1970s. The “first wave” developed gradually over time; the “second wave” occurred after the Allied victory in World War II, and continued until the early 1960s. This second wave was characterized by decolonization around the globe. This third wave is characterized by the defeat of dictatorial or totalitarian rulers from South America to Eastern Europe to some parts of Africa. The recent political turnover in Mexico may be interpreted as part of this “third wave” of democratization.

Why has democratization occurred? According to Huntington some factors are:

• Loss of legitimacy by both right and left wing authoritarian regimes
• Expansion of an urban middle class in developing countries
• A new emphasis on “human rights” by the United States and the European Union
• The “snowball” effect has been important: when one country in a region becomes democratic, it influences others to do so. An example is Poland’s influence on other nations of Eastern Europe.

One of the greatest obstacles to democratization is poverty because it blocks citizen participation in government. Huntington gauges democratic stability by this standard: democracy may be declared when a country has had at least two successive peaceful turnovers of power.

2) Movement Toward Market Economies
Many political economists today declare that the economic competition between capitalism and socialism that dominated the 20th century is now a part of the past. The old command economies, which socialistic principles of centralized planning and state ownership are fading from existence, except in combination with market economies. The issue now is what type of market economy will be most successful: one that allows for significant control from the central government – a “mixed economy” – or one that does not – a pure market economy. For example, modern Germany has a “social market economy” that is team-oriented and emphasizes cooperation between management and organized labor. In contrast, the United States economy tends to be more individualistic and anti-government control.

3) Revival of Ethnic or Cultural Politics
Until recently, few political scientists predicted that fragmentation – divisions based on ethnic or cultural identity – would become increasingly important in world politics. A few years ago nationalism seemed to be declining in favor in increasing globalization. However, nationality questions almost certainly did in Mikhail Gorbachev’s attempts to resuscitate the Soviet Union, and national identities remain strong in most parts of the world. Perhaps most dramatically, the politicization of religion has dominated world politics of the early 21st century. Most Westerners have been caught off guard by this turn of events, especially in the United States, where separation of church and state has been a basic political principle since the founding of the country.

Key terms

Know These Terms