CPO 2001: Introduction to Comparative Politics Fall 2012 Michael Bernhard 313 Anderson, Office Hours: TR 9:40-11:00 TAs: Asli Baysal, Buket Oztas, Kendra Patterson, Sebstian Sclofsky and Tristan Vellinga http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/bernhard/coursepages/cpo2001/cpo2001.htm INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS COMPARATIVE POLITICS? I. THE PLACE OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE. II. VARIETIES OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS. A. Specific versus general research questions. B. Qualitative versus quantitative studies. C. Longitudinal versus cross-national (latitudinal comparisons) III. THE COMPARATIVE METHOD. IV. IS COMPARATIVE POLITICS A SCIENCE? Cause and Effect Condition A gives rise to outcome B A→B Necessary Condition: If not A, then not B Sufficient Condition: If A, then B Variables Dependent variable (x), changes in response to a change in the independent variable Independent variable (y), causes a change in the dependent variable x is a function of y x = f(y) ∆y --> ∆x, but not ∆x --> ∆y (unless they are covariate) Cases France 1789 Russia 1917 China 1949 present present present a) A crisis of the old regime which leads to the crippling of the central state apparatuses of coercion present present present b) An economic crisis which creates the potential for unrest among the subordinate social classes, in this case, the peasantry present present present A communist party absent present present Antecedent Conditions The weakening of the state in relation to its major competitors in the world system, which creates a need for critical reforms. which provokes: Cases 1905 1917 Conditions Relative weakness vis-a-vis rivals present present incapacitating crisis of old regime repressive apparatuses absent present potential for economic unrest present present among peasants -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Result suppression revolution Figure 1: Structure of Moore’s Argument Concerning Modernity and Regime-type Is the bourgeoisie sufficiently strong to pull down the down the structures of feudal society? no Can modernization be achieved by means of “revolution from above” supported by a labor repressive alliance coalition of the feudal aristocracy and the bourgeoisie? yes yes Liberal Democracy _______________ France England United States no Fascism _______________ Germany Japan yes Communism Russia China With failure of “revolution from above” does peasant revolution lead to consolidation of power by a modernizing revolutionary elite? no Persistence of Traditionalism _________________________ India POWER, THE STATE, AND DOMINATION I. INTRODUCTION II. POWER III. DOMINATION IV. THE STATE He who is active in politics strives for power either as a means in serving other aims, ideal or egoistic, or as "power for power's sake," in order to enjoy the prestigefeeling power gives. (PV, 78) Power is the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability exists. (ES, 53) Domination is the probably that a command with a given specific content will be obeyed by a given group of persons. (ES, 53) There is scarcely any task that some political association has not taken in hand, and there is no task that one could say has always been exclusive and peculiar to those associations which are designated as political ones: today the state, or historically, those associations which have been the predecessors of the modern state." (PV, 77) ...the state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. (PV, 78) A "ruling organization" will be called "political" insofar as its existing order is continuously safeguarded within a given territorial area by the threat and application of physical force on the part of the administrative staff. A compulsory political organization with continuous operations ... will be called a "state" insofar as its administrative staff upholds the claim to the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force in the enforcement of its order. (ES, 54) This system of order claims binding authority, not only over the members of the state, the citizens, most of whom have obtained membership by birth, but also to a very large extent over all action taking place in the area of it jurisdiction. It is thus a compulsory organization with a territorial basis. (ES, 56). Like the political institutions historically preceding it, the state is a relation of men dominating men, a relation supported by means of legitimate (i.e. considered to be legitimate) violence. If the state is to exist the dominated must obey the authority claimed by the powers that be. (PV, 78) [T]he modern state is a compulsory association which organizes domination. It has been successful in seeking to monopolize the legitimate use of physical force as a means of domination within a territory. To this end the state has combined the material means of organization in the hands of its leaders, and it has expropriated all autonomous functionaries of estates who formerly controlled these means in their own right. The state has taken their position and now stands in the top place. (PV, 82-3) THE STATE AS SOVEREIGN POWER I. TWO VIEWS OF THE STATE A. David Easton's economic state B. Carl Schmitt's military state C. What's wrong with these pictures II. THE STATE AND SOVEREIGNTY A. External Sovereignty B. Internal Sovereignty THE EXERCISE OF POWER I. INTRODUCTION: CLASSIFICATORY CONCEPTS II. ETZIONI'S CLASSIFICATION OF POWER A. Recapitulation: What is power? B. Coercive power C. Utilitarian power D. Persuasive power Weber's Definition of Power Power is the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability exists. (ES, 53) Etzioni's Classification of Power Sanction\reward\instrument employed Kind of power 1. Physical Coercive 2. Material Utilitarian 3. Symbolic Persuasive normative, normative social, social Sources: "A Classification of Power," The Active Society, (1968). "Classification of Means of Control," Modern Organizations, (1964). THE LEGITIMATION OF DOMINATION I. WHAT IS LEGITIMACY? II. THE THREE IDEAL TYPES OF LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY. A. Legal authority B. Traditional authority C. Charismatic authority III. USING IDEAL-TYPES AS A TOOL OF ANALYSIS Domination is the probably that a command with a given specific content will be obeyed by a given group of persons. (ES, 53) In addition every such system [of domination] attempts to cultivate the belief in its legitimacy. (ES, 213) What is important in the fact that in a given case the particular claim to legitimacy is to a significant degree and according to its type treated as "valid"; that this fact confirms the position of the persons claiming authority and that helps to determine the choice of means of its exercise. (ES, 214) 1. Rational grounds -- resting on a belief in the legality of enacted rules and the right of those elevated to authority under such rules to issues commands (legal authority). 2. Traditional grounds -resting on an established belief in the sanctity of immemorial traditions and the legitimacy of these exercising authority under them (traditional authority); or finally, 3. Charismatic grounds -- resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him (charismatic authority). (ES, 215) The term "charisma" will be applied to a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered extraordinary and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a "leader." In primitive circumstances this kind of quality is thought of as resting on magical powers, whether of prophets, persons with a reputation for therapeutic or legal wisdom, leaders in the hunt, or heroes in war. How the quality in question would be ultimately judged from any ethical, aesthetic, or other such point of view is naturally entirely indifferent for purposes of definition. What is alone important is how the individual is actually regarded by those subject to charismatic authority, by his "followers" or "disciples." (ES, 241-2) Charismatic rulership in the typical sense described above always results from unusual, especially political or economic situations, or from extraordinary psychic, particularly religious states, or from both together. It arises from collective excitement produced by extraordinary events and from surrender to heroism of any kind. (ES, 1121) If proof and success elude the leader for long, if he appears deserted by his god or his magical or heroic powers, above all, if his leadership fails to benefit his followers, it is likely that his charismatic authority will disappear (ES, 242). Every charisma is on the road from a turbulently emotional life that knows no economic rationality to a slow death by suffocation under the weight of material interests: every hour of its existence brings it nearer to this end. (ES, 1120) POLYARCHY I. INTRODUCTION II. POLYARCHY AND DEMOCRACY III. CONDITIONS FOR A RESPONSIVE REGIME IV. CONTESTATION AND PARTICIPATION V. WHY GOVERNMENTS IN POWER DO NOT ALWAYS SUPPRESS THEIR OPPONENTS? OR WHY REGIMES DEMOCRATIZE? TAKE ONE... I assume that a key characteristic of a democracy is the continuing responsiveness of the government to the preferences of its citizens, considered as political equals. What other characteristics might be required for a system to be strictly democratic, I do not intend to consider here. In this book I should like to reserve the term "democracy" for a political system one of the characteristics of which is the quality of being completely or almost completely responsive to all its citizens. (12). ...all full citizens must have unimpaired opportunities: 1. To formulate their preferences 2. To signify their preferences to their fellow citizens and the government by individual and collective action 3. To have their preferences weighed equally in the conduct of government, that is, weighed with no discrimination because of the content or source of the preference (2). Dahl's three axioms on the toleration of opposition 1. The likelihood that a government will tolerate an opposition increases as the expected costs of toleration decrease. 2. The likelihood that a government will tolerate an opposition increases as the expected cost of suppression increase. 3. The more the costs of suppression exceed the costs of toleration, the greater the chance for a competitive regime (16). Reconstruction of Table 1.1: "Some Requirements for a Democracy among a Large Number of People To formulate their preferences: 1. Freedom to form and join organizations 2. Freedom of expression 3. Right to vote 4. Right of political leaders to compete for support 5. Alternative sources of information To signify their preferences to their fellow citizens and the government by individual and collective action 1 - 5 above, plus: 6. Eligibility for public office 7. Free and fair elections To have their preferences weighed equally in the conduct of government, that is, weighed with no discrimination because of the content or source of the preference 1-3 above, 5-7 above, plus: a modification of 4: 4. Right of political leaders to compete for support 4a. Right of political leaders to compete for votes • and 8. Institutions for making government policies depend on votes and other expressions of preference VARIETIES OF EXECUTIVE POWER IN POLYARCHIES, PRESIDENTIALISM VERSUS PARLIAMENTARISM I. INTRODUCTION II. PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEMS III. PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEMS IV. EXECUTIVE DYARCHY V. OTHER MECHANISMS FOR CONSTRAINING EXECUTIVE POWER Duverger’s defining characteristics of semi-presidentialism: • 1) the president is directly elected by universal suffrage • 2) the presidency has considerable powers • 3) the president shares power with a prime minister who is responsible to the legislature PARTY AND VOTING SYSTEMS I. INTRODUCTION: THE ROLE OF PARTIES IN POLYARCHY A. Governance B. Representation II. COMPETITIVE PARTY SYSTEMS III. VOTING SYSTEMS A. "Winner take all" B. Proportional representation IV. DO VOTING RULES MATTER? V. CONCLUSION: REPRESENTATION VS. GOVERNANCE Conditions for democratic elections 1. Elections take place regularly and within a prescribed time limit 2. Substantially the entire adult population has the right to vote and run for office. 3. No group in the adult population is denied the opportunity of forming a party and putting up candidates 4. All the seats in the major legislative chamber can be contested and usually are Conditions for democratic elections (continued) 5. Campaigns are conducted with reasonable fairness, in that the neither the law nor violence nor intimidation bars any of the candidates from presenting their views to the voters or prevents the voters from discussing them. 6. Votes are case freely and secretly; they are counted and reported honestly; and the candidates who receive the proportions of the vote required by law are duly installed in office until their terms expire, at which time a new election is held. British General Election of 1983 MODERN DICTATORSHIP I. INTRODUCTION II. CLASSIFICATION AND TYPOLOGY III. LINZ'S IDEAL-TYPE OF TOTALITARIANISM IV. LINZ'S IDEAL-TYPE OF AUTHORITARIANISM V. WHY IS THIS A TYPOLOGY? Regimes Modern Democratic Totalitarian Traditional Non-democratic Authoritarian Linz's three characteristics of totalitarian regimes (191-2) 1. There is a monistic but not monolithic center of power, and whatever pluralism of institutions or groups exist derives its legitimacy from that center, is largely mediated by it, and is mostly a political creation rather than an outgrowth of the dynamics of the preexisting society. 2. There is an exclusive, autonomous, and more or less intellectually elaborate ideology with which the ruling group or leader, and the party serving the leaders, identify and which they use as a basis for policies or manipulate to legitimize them. The ideology has some boundaries beyond which lies heterodoxy that does not remain unsanctioned. The ideology goes beyond a particular program or definition of the boundaries of legitimate political action to provide, presumably, some ultimate meaning, sense of historical purpose, and interpretation of social reality. 3. Citizen participation in and active mobilization for political and collective social tasks are encouraged, demanded, rewarded, and channeled through a single party and many monopolistic secondary groups. Passive obedience and apathy, retreat into the role of "parochials" and "subjects," of many authoritarian regimes, are considered undesirable by the rulers. Linz's characterization of authoritarian regimes (164) …political systems with limited, not responsible, political pluralism, without elaborate and guiding ideology, but with distinctive mentalities, without extensive not intensive political mobilization, except at some points in their development, and in which a leader or occasionally a small group exercises power within formally illdefined limits but actually quite predictable ones. A comparison of the two ideal-types: Totalitarianism, point 1 -There is a monistic but not monolithic center of power, and whatever pluralism of institutions or groups exist derives its legitimacy from that center, is largely mediated by it, and is mostly a political creation rather than an outgrowth of the dynamics of the preexisting society. Excerpts from Authoritarianism -political systems with limited, not responsible, political pluralism... in which a leader or occasionally a small group exercises power within formally illdefined limits but actually quite predictable ones. Totalitarianism, point 2 – There is an exclusive, autonomous, and more or less intellectually elaborate ideology with which the ruling group or leader, and the party serving the leaders, identify and which they use as a basis for policies or manipulate to legitimize them. The ideology has some boundaries beyond which lies heterodoxy that does not remain unsanctioned. The ideology goes beyond a particular program or definition of the boundaries of legitimate political action to provide, presumably, some ultimate meaning, sense of historical purpose, and interpretation of social reality. Excerpts from Authoritarianism -...without elaborate and guiding ideology, but with distinctive mentalities... Totalitarianism, point 3 – Citizen participation in and active mobilization for political and collective social tasks are encouraged, demanded, rewarded, and channeled through a single party and many monopolistic secondary groups. Passive obedience and apathy, retreat into the role of "parochials" and "subjects," of many authoritarian regimes, are considered undesirable by the rulers. Excerpts from Authoritarianism -...without extensive not intensive political mobilization, except at some points in their development... Distinction between ideology and mentality (Linz, 266-7) ...ideologies are systems of thought more or less intellectually elaborated and organized, often in written form, by intellectuals, pseudointellectuals, or with their assistance. Mentalities are ways of thinking and feeling, more emotional than rational, that provide uncodified ways of reacting to different situations. Brzezinski and Friedrich's definition of Totalitarianism (1) a totalist ideology; (2) a single party committed to this ideology and usually led by one man or dictator; (3) a fully developed secret police and three kinds of monopoly or precisely monopolistic control: namely that of (a) mass communications, (b) operational weapons, and (c) all organizations including economic ones, thus involving a centrally planned economy... (Linz, p. 187) TOTALITARIAN SYSTEMS I. INTRODUCTION II. FRIEDRICH AND BRZEZINSKI'S DEFINITION III. TOTALIST IDEOLOGY IV. PARTY AND DICTATOR V. THE SECRET POLICE VI. THE THREE MONOPOLIES A. Mass communications B. Operational weapons C. Organizational Brzezinski and Friedrich's definition of Totalitarianism (1) a totalist ideology; (2) a single party committed to this ideology and usually led by one man or dictator; (3) a fully developed secret police and three kinds of monopoly or precisely monopolistic control: namely that of (a) mass communications, (b) operational weapons, and (c) all organizations including economic ones, thus involving a centrally planned economy... 1) a totalist ideology; 2) a single party committed to this ideology and usually led by one man or dictator; 3) a fully developed secret police; 4,5,6> and three kinds of monopoly or precisely monopolistic control: (a) mass communications, (b) operational weapons, and (c) all organizations including economic ones, thus involving a centrally planned economy... AUTHORITARIAN REGIMES I. II. Introduction Subtypes of Authoritarianism A. Personalistic B. Military Regimes C. One-Party States D. Neo-Theocracies E. Competitive Authoritarian Competitive Authoritarianism I Competitive authoritarianism must be distinguished from democracy on the one hand and full-scale authoritarianism on the other. Modern democratic regimes all meet four minimum criteria: 1) Executives and legislatures are chosen through elections that are open, free, and fair; 2) virtually all adults possess the right to vote; 3) political rights and civil liberties…are broadly protected; and 4) elected authorities possess real authority to govern, in that they are not subject to the tutelary control of military or clerical leaders. Although even fully democratic regimes may at times violate one or more of these criteria, such violations are not broad or systematic enough to seriously impede democratic challenges to incumbent governments. Competitive Authoritarianism II In competitive authoritarian regimes, by contrast, violations of these criteria are both frequent enough and serious enough to create an uneven playing field between government and opposition. Although elections are regularly held and are generally free of massive fraud, incumbents routinely abuse state resources, deny the opposition adequate media coverage, harass opposition candidates and their supporters, and in some cases manipulate electoral results. Journalists, opposition politicians, and other government critics may be spied on, threatened, harassed, or arrested. Members of the opposition may be jailed, exiled, or—less frequently—even assaulted or murdered. Regimes characterized by such abuses cannot be called democratic. DEVELOPMENT I. INTRODUCTION II. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT III. POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT IV. WHY DO COUNTRIES FAIL TO DEVELOP? A. Conventional explanations B. Dependence and neo-colonialism DEVELOPMENT AND REGIME-TYPE I. INTRODUCTION II. IS THERE A TRADE-OFF BETWEEN DEMOCRACY AND DEVELOPMENT? III. PATTERNS OF AUTHORITARIAN DEVELOPMENT A. Does authoritarianism promote development? B. Autarkic Giants in the age of machinofacture C. Trading States in the age of microelectronics D. Is it possible to have an open economy and a closed society? IV. WHAT DOES DEMOCRACY DO BETTER? CAPITALIST SYSTEMS: THE MAIN FEATURES I. THE EXCHANGE RELATIONSHIP II. MONEY AS A STORE OF VALUE AND A MEANS FOR GENERALIZING THE EXCHANGE RELATIONSHIP III. THE MARKET AS A FORM OF ALLOCATION IV. THE FOUR MAIN MARKETS IN A MARKET ECONOMY V. THE CAPITALIST MARKET SYSTEM Lindblom's definition of Exchange (p. 33) It [exchange] is a relation between two (or sometimes more) persons each of whom offers a benefit in order to induce a response. The offer is, therefore, contingent on achieving a response. A benefit is anything that the recipient perceives to be desirable, whether he perceives correctly or not. In the simplest exchange, two people stumble onto the knowledge each has or can do something that the other wants. Or one person finds that another person has or can do something he wants, and he casts about to find a benefit that he can offer the other in order to induce the other to do as he wishes. Not merely a method for reshuffling the possession of things, exchange is a method of controlling behavior and of organizing cooperation among men. MARKET, CAPITALISM, AND DEMOCRACY I. Introduction II. What the State Must do in Capitalist Economy III. Why the Market is not Enough? IV. Market Failure A. Public Goods and the Free Rider Problem B. Externalities C. Monopoly and other Forms of Unfair Competition D. Market Morality V. The Strange Relationship between Capitalism and Democracy VI. Why is Business Priviliged Under Polyarchy? A. The Executive as Public Official B. A Privileged Position at the Table C. Business Particution in Polyarchy COMMUNISM AS A FAILED FORM OF MODERNITY I. Introduction II. Replacing the Market and Private Property A. Nationalization B. Collectivization C. Planning III. Forced Savings, Extensive Growth and Directed Development IV. The Crisis of Extensive Growth and the Failure to Reform Chirot’s Phases of the Industrial Age Years Technical Innovation Dominant Power 1780s-1830s cotton and textiles Great Britain 1840s-1870s rail and iron Great Britain 1870s-WW I steel, organic chemicals, electric machinery United States & Germany WW I -1970s petrochemicals, automobiles United States 1970s- electronics, information, biotechnology ??? THE SEARCH FOR DEMOCRATIC PREREQUISITES I. INTRODUCTION II. CULTURAL PREREQUISITES OF DEMOCRACY III. ECONOMIC PREREQUISITES OF DEMOCRACY IV. CONTRARY EVIDENCE Indices of Wealth Means European and Englishspeaking Stable Democracies European and Englishspeaking Unstable Democracies and Dictatorships Latin American Democracies and Unstable Dictatorships Latin American Stable Dictatorships Per Capita Income in $ 695 Thousands of Persons Per Doctor .86 Persons Per Motor Vehicle Telephones per 1,000 Persons 17 205 308 1.4 143 58 171 2.1 99 25 119 4.4 274 10 Ranges European Stable Democracies 420 - 1,453 .7 - 1.2 European Dictatorships 128 - 482 .6 - 4 10 - 538 Latin American Democracies 112 - 346 .8 - 3.3 31 - 174 12 - 58 1.0 - 10.8 38 - 428 1 - 24 Latin American Stable Dictatorships 40 - 331 3 - 62 43 - 400 7 - 196 PROCESSES OF REGIME CHANGE -BREAKDOWN, LIBERALIZATION, TRANSITION AND CONSOLIDATION I. INTRODUCTION II. DEMOCRATIC BREAKDOWN III. DEMOCRATIZATION A. Liberalization B. Transition C. Consolidation LIBERALIZERS Stay with hardliners SDIC open CIVIL SOCIETY organize LIBERALIZERS enter BDIC repress turn into reformers r NDIC 1-r INSURRECTION TRANSITION Key: SDIC = Status Quo Dictatorship, NDIC = Narrow Dictatorship, BDIC = Broadened Dictatorship, r = probability that repression will succeed. Source: Przeworski, 1991, (Figure 2.1) : 62.