INTRODUCTION Since ancient times, scholars, thinkers and political scientists have been studying various ‘models of governance and politics. The study so far may not have been conclusive but it draws upon a general systemization of socio-economic and political factors at play. ‘The focus has been the government and political process, institution and their behaviour, and political thoughts. Comparative polities covers many ofthe same subject but from the perspective of parallel political behaviour in different countries and regions. Inthe study ofppolitical science, while itis certainly important to learn about the facts pertaining to the institutions of three or more countries, it cannot be called comparative polities until itis a comparative study. What are the useful types of comparisons? The earliest and the most original form of comparative goverument isthe study of constitutions. The base of this study i Aristotle's compilation ofthe constitutions, and practice of 158 Greek city-states. Of these, only the Constitution of Athens is still existent. Although undeniably, the comparative study of different city-states consolidates, a few of the generalizations in Aristotle's Politics. This is similar to the manner in which, the comparative study of different living organisms constitutes his biological writing. However, since Aristotle, biology scaled new heights, but the comparative study of constitutions has not achieved such heights. This is partly because it is not easy to achieve the optimum balance of generality. A few research studies have compared countries all overthe world, These studies provide some useful statistical generalizations. However, no academic agreement has been found on basic questions like the relationship between the economic development ofa country and its level of democracy. A different ‘way of looking at itis by considering all cases of a common phenomenon—such as revolutions, totalitarian states, or transitions to democracy. In few of the cases, this point of view is difficult to define, for instance, revolution, ‘The most popular form of comparative government is still the elaborate study of selected policies in two or more countries. Researchers are always focused on the issues of ‘too few cases’ ot ‘too many variables’. There may be a large number of factors which cause @ country to become a corporatist nation and other factors which influence the rate of growth of economy. Yet, the present-day researchers are more sensitive to the problems pertaining to generalization and correspondingly more cautious in their conclusions, than the researchers of ancient times. This book, Comparative Politics, hs been designed keeping in mind the self- instructional mode (SIM) format and follows a simple pattern, wherein each unit ofthe book begins with the Introduction followed by the Unit Objectives for the topic. The content is then presented ina simple and casy-to-understand manner, and is interspersed with Check Your Progress questions to reinforce the student’s understanding of the topic. A list of Questions and Exercises is also provided at the end of each unit. The Summary and Key Terms further act as useful tools for students and are meant for effective recapitulation of the text. Introduction NOTES Seyftmructonal MaterialUNIT 1 COMPARATIVE POLITICS. AN OVERVIEW Structure 1.0 Introduetion 1.1. Unit Objectives 1.2 Comparative Politics: An Introduction 2.1. Popiilar Definitions of Comparative Politics 2.2. Nature of Comparative Governments 1.3 Nature, Scope and Approaches to Comparative Polities 3.1 Major Approaches 32. New Approaches to the Study of Government and Politics 33 Input-Output Analysis 34 Structural-Funetional Analysis 5 Decision-Making Theories 136. Marxist Methodology forthe Study of Comparative Government and Politics 14 Summary 15 Key Terms 1.6 Answers to ‘Check Your Progress” 1.7 Questions and Exercises 18 Further Reading 1.0 INTRODUCTION ‘Comparative polities is field of politial science characterized by an empirical approach based on the comparative method. The study of comparative politics depends on conscious comparisons inthe field of political experience, behaviour and processes. ‘The study of governments is a significant part of the study of polities. The ‘comparative study of government and politics isan essential requirement forthe field of political science. The nature of comparative politics seeks to analyse and compare different political systems that work under different societies ‘One of the most important challenges in politcal science was to develop abroadly applicable theory of the political system. This theory was developed by David Easton. ‘The outputs of political system are authoritative decisions and actions of the political authorities for the distribution and division of values. This unit will introduce you to comparative politics and its nature and significance. 1.1. UNIT OBJECTIVES After going through this unit, you will be able to: * Define comparative polities * Discuss the nature and scope of comparative polities, + Assess the importance of studying comparative polities * Analyse the various approaches to comparative politics Comparative Politics: “An Overviw NOTES Seiftnsructional, Motel sComparative Potts: An Overiew 4 NOTES Seiptnsrucionat Material 1.2.) COMPARATIVE POLITIC: N INTRODUCTIO! Like any other form of evolutionary process, comparative government evolved into its, present form over a period of time. When you study the evolution of comparative ‘governments, you study how political systems and procedures vary across countries and across time periods. The actual evidence of undertaking sucha study came to prominence inthe 1950s, but its roots are even older. Aristotle can be called the ‘ancestral father’ of the study of comparative polities, since the methods that he used in assigning polities among the sciences and problems and questions that he raised are still prevalent in current political studies. A comparative study of the diversity of lives among people of different nations is sometimes surprising. Consider the differences in the lives of the people staying in the US and Somalia. Somatiais one of the poorest nations inthe world, which is located in the Hom of Africa with an area of around 6,37,657 square kilometres and a population ‘ofaround 93,60,000 people, Is official languages are Somali and Arabic, Inhabited since the Paleolithic times, itis a country of pyramidal structures, tombs and ruined cities ‘which hintat an ancient sophisticated civilization. The current circumstances, however, are far from the realms of sophistication. Most countries have raised themselves from the ashes and remerged after World War Il, However, the case of Somalia has not been. that good. The communist rule and the Somali Civil War, that followed, were causes of destruction of the nation. These factors disrupted the whole system in many ways and, plunged the nation into great adversity. The new coalition government tried to reform the ‘country with the help of the United Nations and other developed countries, yet the condition is far from normal. ‘The United States of America, on the other hand, is one of the superpowers of the world. With an area of98,26,675 kmand an estimated population of about 31,07,15,000, this country has no official language at the federal level. English is the national language. Following the American revolutionary war, the country gained its independence on 4 July 1776, The after-effects of World War I plunged the nation into a state of great depression. But the country sustained and emerged as a superpower after World War ILIebecame the first country in the world to possess nuclear weapons. Over the years, the nation and its citizens have progressed by leaps and bounds Hence, for a clear output, the study of comparative polities must depend upon ‘conscious comparisons in the study of political experience, institutions, behaviour and, the processes of the different systems of different governments. Need for the study of comparative governments It is now generally felt that a pragmatic evaluation of the government and polities or political system of one’s own country is made possible by recognizing the governmental processes of other countries or their political systems. A comparative study of govemments not only streamlines the progress of objective and rational judgement about political systems, buta the same time disperses the dangerously ambiguous form of ethnocentrism, that one’s own country is superior to any other. The study of governments is significant part ofthe study of politics. The structure and behaviour of government makes an exciting and challenging area of concer for the students of politcal science, Modem governments are rising more and more as essential instrumentalities of versatile development, particularly in he developing nations of Asia,Africa and Latin America, They also act as active forces in the formation of economic, social and environmental conditions. ‘The world’s political systems include a vast variety of institutions, processes and interactions and no two governments, past or present, have been the same. In other ‘words, governments have varied in complexity Instances can be multiplied atrandom to confirm the rather simplistic view that different societies require different kinds of ‘government to realize their particular needs. “Modem courses in the field of political science, thus, almost consistently include surveys ofthe governmental and political systems. Examples of these are the processes of Great Britain, France, Germany Italy and the US, Russia, Scandinavia, Switzerland, Latin America, Near Eastern, Middle-Eastern, Far-Eastem and other Asian and African countries are also occasional additions to this category. The decline of some former great powers and emergence of new nations have affected the processes of inclusion and exclusion. A comparative analysis of political structures and processes, both within and across political systems, i for that reason an essential requirement for the students of political science. Ifcomparative government and politics are broad in range (as they have actually been to include al political systems and reach forces and motives below the surface of ‘governmental institutions) they can encompass nearly the whole of political science. Hence, practically, comparative govemment is not only the most important subsystem of the discipline of political science, but itis also very nuclear, ‘The comparative study of government and politics has preoccupied a large number of fine methodical theorists and philosophers. Itis well known that Aristotle, in his time, compared and contrasted various political systems and developed an explanatory theory regarding their generation, In a way, Aristotle was certainly the first scholar of comparative government and considered the study of comparative government as the oldest and most significant to attract the attention of mankind. Since then, comparative government hasbeen a flourishing subject. For centuries ater Aristotle, scholars have engaged themselves in the comparative investigation of foreign cultures, with varying degrees of complexity. With the increase in the tension and rivalry between democratic and undemocratic political systems, the impact of the so-called “Third World’ during the Cold War era, the growing importance ofiinformal politics, the tility of synthesis of data and the nature and range of comparison "underwent a transformation. The decreasing emphasis ofthe traditional approach logically concluded in the so-called “behavioural revolution’. In the 1950s and 1960s, the study of ‘comparative government was drastically transformed despite consequent reactions against the behavioural tidal wave, It had scaled new heights of precision, firmmess and theoretical order. Ithad also acquired an altogether new style of analysis, which was not known tll then. Improvement in concepts and methods, impulses coming from interdisciplinary emphasis on area studies and the growing significance of the politics of developing areas, all combined to bring about an unadulterated ‘revolution’ in the study of this, subject. 1.2.1 Popular Definitions of Comparative Politics According to M. G. Smith, ‘Comparative polities is the study of the forms of political ‘organizations, their properties, correlations, variations and modes of change.” According to Roy C. Macridis and Robert Ward, ‘Government is not the sole concem of students of comparative polities.” Comparative polities, no doubt, has to be Comparative Polite: ‘An Overview NOTES. Seiftnsructional,Comparative Potts: An Overview NOTES Seiptnsrucionat Material concerned with the government structure but a the same time it has to take note of the following: + Society, historical heritage and geographic and resource endowed + Its social and economic organizations *+ Its ideologies and value systems + Itspolitical style + Itsparties, interests, and leadership structure According to M. Curtis, “Comparative polities is concerned with significant regularities, similarities and differences inthe working of political institutions and political behaviour.” According to F. A. Freeman, ‘Comparative politics is comparative analysis ofthe various forms of government and diverse political institutions.” Allthese definitions provide a basis for the study of comparative governments in its contemporary term. Itinvolves a comparative study ofthe institutional and mechanistic arrangements along with the empirical and scientific analysis ofnor-insttutionatized and, non-political determinants of political behaviour, 1.2.2 Nature of Comparative Governments ‘The nature of comparative politics secks to analyse and compare different political systems that work under different societies. Therefore, it takes into account al the three associations of polities which are as follows: 1, Political activity 2. Political process 3. Political power Political activity deals with the activities involved in the resolution of conflictor in the struggle for power. The basis of conflict resolution is the authoritative allocation of, values; hence, it involves an analysis ofthe process by which the authoritative values are made and implemented. Inthis sense, polities stands for political power. It involves the study of all government as well as non-state agencies, through which the political process is made operational. ‘The political process depends upon the signals and information which itreceives from non-state agencies. It further transforms these signals and information into authoritative values. Politics, hence, involves the study of power and power relations in society since itis a struggle for power and a process of conflict resolution through the use of legitimate power. ‘The study of contemporary comparative politics is characterized by the following features: ‘* Analytical research: Great stress is laid on analytical research when it comes, tothe study of contemporary comparative polities, as itis no longer confined to descriptive studies. Empirical analytic research, thus, works on providing a clearer view of the actual activities of the governments along with their structures and fimetions. '* Objective study of political science: This deals with the empirical study of the various processes of political study indifferent environments. Since political science is a social science, it takes into account only those values whose validity can be demonstrated scientifically.‘© Study of infrastructures: Comparative polities also analyses the actual nature of individual, groups, structures, systems and subsystems, in relation to the environment in which the behaviour manifests. The study of the dynamics of polities and its actual operation in the environment is regarded as an essential component of comparative polities ‘+ Study of developing and developed societies: Farlier, comparative polities ‘was only confined to the study of the political systems of developed societies. However, ithas evolved in contemporary times and it stresses on the study of politcal systems of developingnnationsas well. In fact, modem political scientists like David aston and Sidney Verba, besides many others, are ofthe opinion that emphasis should be given tothe study of politics of developing nations. ‘These added features of contemporary polities make us see comparative polities from a different point of view. Ithas completely rejected all old norms and. parochial nature of traditional comparative politics, Now, itis a more realistic study of politics which is capable of explaining and comparing the phenomenon of politics all around the world. 1.35 NATURE, SCOPE AND APPROACHES TO COMPARATIVE POLITICS Although the terms ‘comparative polities’ and ‘comparative government’ are usually used loosely and interchangeably, there still lies a point of difference between the two. While comparative government deals with an extensive study of different politcal systems with special emphasis on their institutions and functions, comparative politics has a much broader scope. Itcoversall that which comes under the study of the latter, along with the study of non-state polities. Hence, comparative polities covers a much wider area in the study of politics 1.3.1 Major Approaches [But whatever the approach or the origin ofits ideas, we can say that political science asa discipline is concemed withthe problems of ends; the goals of good soviet; the means of governing in sch a manner a8 1 realize the good society, te activities ofthe ruled (the public), especially politcal ations personified in voting, pubic opinion and aude formation; and the underlying connections ‘between sovety and government. Its key concer is with power—how itis shared through parcipation and representation and how itis affected by growth and change. David E.Apter ‘Source: Apter, Inroduction to Political Analysis (New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of india, 1978), p17 ‘The study of comparative polities is so interesting because of the different approaches, methods and techniques used inthe realization of politcal reality’. Anumber of significant writers hold contrary viewpoints and adopt different strategies. The results, however, seem to be interrelated or synonymous. With the passage of time, some approaches have become stringent and have had to give way to new and contemporary methods, With a view ofhighlighting the meanings of different themes usedin the sphere of contemporary political analysis, David Apter defines some of them in the following, ‘manner: Comparative Politics: ‘dn Overview NOTES. ‘Check Your Progress 1, State the need for the study of ‘comparative Eovernment 2. Fillin he bla, ( Thenature of comparative polities secks co analyse and compare diffrent ‘hat ‘work under diffrent societies i) A___stuty ofgovemments streamlines the progress of| objective nd tational judgement about politica systems, Seif terrain Matera! 7Comparative Potties: An Overiew NOTES Seiptnsrucionat Material + Paradigm: Itisa framework ofideas that establishes a general context of analysis. Fundamentally, paradigms combine a mixture of philosophical assumptions and criteria of valid knowledge. The resulting combinations are sharply distinguished from each other. # Theory: Itisa generalized statement summarizing the real or supposed actions ofa set of variables, whether dependent, or independent, or intervening. Parameters represent the conditions within which independent variables ‘operate. A macro or micro theory may deal with large or small groups or units, Moreover, it may be abstract, or formal or notational, or concrete. # Method: It is a way of organizing a theory for application to data. Thus, methods are known by the names of conceptual schemes. They may be of ‘many types like comparative, configurational, historical, simulative and ‘experimental # Technique: It links method to the relevant data, It represents various modes ‘of observation and ways ofreconding empirical information. As uch, techniques ‘vary in appropriateness, sampling, publie-opinion testing, interviewing, regression analysis, factoring, scaling and testing. ‘+ Model: Itis simplified way of describing relationships. Itcan be constructed. froma paradigm, a theory, a method or technique. It may be typological, descriptive, formal, mechanical, organismic, biological, ete «Strategy: It isa peculiar way of applying one or more combinations of the above type to a research problem. It is required that quality and integrity should be combined in a strategy. A good strategy fits a problem, theory, ‘methods and techniques together ina systematic and coherent way. + Research design: Itconverts strategy into an operational plan for field work ‘or an experiment. It is a prospectus or an outline from which research is carried forward, tis a final stage in professional research preparation, The traditional approach ‘The traditional approach othe study of comparative governments emerged asa response to historicism of the 19th century. It stressed the historical examination of Western political institutions from the earliest to the modern times. The traditionalists, either theoretically philosophized about democracy and other subjects, or made a formal and legal study of governmental institutions. The analysis was basically configurative and each system was treated as a unique entity. The approach was heavily descriptive rather than problem-solving, explanatory, or analytic in its method, and its description was incomplete and limited to forms of government and of foreign political systems. Roy Macridis, author of Modern Political Regimes, has very systematically and clearly summarized major features ofthe traditional approach. He briefly points out that the approach has been essentially non-comparative, descriptive, parochial, static and ‘monographic. Similarly, Almond and Powell have identified three major premises that have dominated the criticism ofthe approach to comparative government feature ofthe pre-World War I period. These premises are as follows: + ltsparochiatism + Its configurative analysis © Its formalismHarry Eckstein also points out the influence of abstract theory, formal legal studies and configuration studies that characterize the reaction against historicism in political studi First, as Macridis points out, the traditional approach addressed itself mainly to ‘Wester political systems. The stress was on single-culture configuration, i.c., the representative democracies of the Wester world and the study was limited to Britain and the Commonwealth countries, the US, France, Germany, Italy and Russia Undemocratie Wester systems and political systems of Asia, Africa and Latin America were studied by a handful of adventurist researchers, Cross-cultural studies were almost entirely unidentified The study was limited not only in range, but also in depth; only the isolated aspects of governmental process within the specific countries were analysed, ‘The study was more often monographic and comparative. ‘Second, the comparative study of polities was extremely formalin its approach towards political institutions. The study was focused on governmental institutions and their legal models, ules and regulations, or political ideas and ideologies, rather than on performance, interaction and behaviour. It pays no attention tthe influence of informal factors on decision-making and also the non-political determinants of political behaviour. Only formal institutional organs like parliaments, chief executives, civil services, etc., ‘were applicable for institutional and structural-functional comparison. The realities of political action and behaviour within institutional structures were not given any serious ‘thought. The traditional study in this respect was greatly unrealistic. ‘Third, the traditional study, as mentioned earlier, was mainly descriptive rather than analytical, explanatory or problem-solving in its method. The emphasis was on pure description in terms ofa large number of facts. There was litte attempt to develop a general theory by verification of hypothesis and compilation of significant data. It has been very aptly pointed out that the empirical deficiency of traditional analysis was the adjoining drive forbehaviourism. This is what Robert Dahl called ‘empirical theory’ in contemporary studies. Themood of discontent wth subjectivism and formalism ofthe traditional approach to the study of government and politics was led by the logic of the situation to the process of reconstruction ofthe discipline. A number of factors worked to bring about a radical change first in the outlook ofthe US and then other count Accordingto some authors, three factors—changes in philosophy, changes in the social sciences and technological innovations in research—may not completely account forthe behavioural innovation in political science, but provide sufficient explanation for the growth and prosperity of the movement. According to Peter Merkl, author of Making ofa Stormtrooper, the most momentous single factor for the current transformation of the study of comparative polities was the rising importance ofthe politics of developing areas. With the great rush of former colonies to independence and nationhood, and with theirincreasing importance in world politics, these countries of Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America simply could no longer be unseen. ‘Almond and Powell mentioned some developments being chiefly responsible for the new situation, These are as follows: ‘+ Thenational emergence of a multitude of nations with a baffling variety of cultures ‘+ Social institutions and political traits ‘+ The loss of dominance of the nations ofthe Atlantic community Comparative Polite: ‘An Overview NOTES. Seip tsructionalComparative Potts: An Overiew NOTES Seiptnsrucionat 10 Sarena The changing balance of power * The emergence of communism asa power factorin the process of restructuring national + International political systems ‘The revolution in comparative polities All these factors led to dynamic efforts in innovation and to an effort to create a new rational order. The result was, as Sidney Verba so aptly comments, “A revolution in ‘comparative polities’. Verba has adequately summed up the principles behind the ‘revolution’: ‘Look beyond description to more theoretically relevant problems; look ‘beyond the formal institutions of government to political process and political functions; and look beyond the countries of Wester Furope tothe new nations of Asia, Afiica and Latin America” In the language of Almond and Powell, the efforts at innovation were ‘motivated by the search for more comprehensive scope, the scarch for realism, the search for precision and the search for theoretical order Nature and directions of the transformation It is not really needed at this stage to concern ourselves with the specifics of the ‘behavioural phenomena, A more ap thought will be the general nature ofthe transformation, brought about by behavioural influence in the field of government and politics and the ccontral features ofthis approach within the purview of our study. It must be noted that the behavioural approach has now been generally accepted and incorporated into the discipline Under the influence ofthe behavioural reform, the institutional mode of analysis has been restored by the process mode. Behaviourists study the behaviour of people and ‘groups rather than the structure, institutions, ideologies or events. Itis now largely agreed, that the process mode avoids the static quality of structural analysis. It has a dynamic «dimension hats particulary valuable in accurately capturing the mercurial quality ofpolitcal life, Secondly, the state was no more regarded as the central organizing concept, and attention was now paid to the empirical investigation of relations among human beings. Smaller, more manageable units like individuals and groups and their interaction became the centre of study. In the third place, one ofthe directions of practical innovation had been the redefining of institutions s systems of related individual behaviour orsystems of social action. For example, instead of studying the American Supreme Court or the American, ‘Congress as isolated institutions, behaviourists enquire about the behaviour pattems of the justices ofthe Supreme Court and of the members of the Congress. Inthe fourth place, in terms of the methods, one finds a diverse tendency toward the building of complicated models, the use of quantitative techniques of statistical ‘measurements and management of computers in speeding up the management of large amounts of quantitative data and in stimulating administrative or military processes of decision-making. Lastly, as Sydney Verba has examined, some of the fruits of revolution have been atich body of theoretical literature, a proliferation of frameworks, paradigms and theories, and elaborate system models, which are important as part of the intellectual equipment of the students of political systems. Some of these paradigms and frameworks have ‘often been so abstract as to suggest no clear focus on problem, but nobody can question the utility ofthese models in accounting forthe observed regularities of political behaviour and for providing a solid foundation for its further study.