Intro to Comparative Politics Sept. 22

Lecture Overview Focus of comparative politics The “science” of political science? Quick history of comparative politics

Focus of Comparative Politics What is the focus of comparative politics?

Focus of Comparative Politics Internal Power Structures: “Comparative politics does not ignore external influences on internal structures, but its ultimate concern is power configurations within [political] systems” (Caramani, 2008: 3).

Focus of Comparative Politics - often simply means studying foreign countries - the use of case studies - area specialists It need not be explicitly comparative. The editor of our textbook doesn’t endorse such an approach (Caramani, 2008: 4).

Focus of Comparative Politics A comparative study may focus on a small number of countries (two or more) or it may attempt to incorporate the analysis of a very large range of countries. Countries, in fact, need not be the unit of analysis, sub-national regional political units or supra-national units may be the focus.

The “science” of political science? “the intent of comparative politics is that of a rigorous scientific and empirical field of study: description, explanation, and prediction (Caramani, 2008: 20). Is political science a science? Do social sciences differ from natural sciences? How and why?

The “science” of political science? Daniele Caramani suggests (2008: 3) that, “Whereas political theory deals with normative questions (about equality, democracy, justice, etc.), comparative politics deals with empirical questions.” “Even though comparative political scientists are of course concerned also by normative questions, the discipline as such is empirical and value-neutral”

The “science” of political science? Is it possible to create a value-free or ‘neutral’ political science? Is it desirable to create a value-free or ‘neutral’ political science?

Origins of comparative politics Plato and Aristotle, while usually considered political theorists, were engaged in the process of comparing different political regimes:  aristocracy, oligarchy, democracy, tyranny

Origins of comparative politics Modern comparative politics can be traced back to (among others): Machiavelli, The Prince, Montesquieu, On the Spirit of the Laws, 1748 Alexis de Tocqueville, On Democracy in America, 1835

Formal-legal, institutional approach First half of the 20 th century, the emerging discipline of political science focused on the formal-legal institutions of the state.

Political Behaviour, Political Culture In the 1950s and 60s, attention turned toward the study of the political behaviour and political attitudes of the public. The “behavioural revolution” This was facilitated by developments in survey techniques and emerging computerization. This greatly increased the possibility for number-crunching among social scientists.

The reaction against the behavioural revolution The new form of empirical political science still has its proponents today, but by the late 1960s it was under attack from a variety of directions and for a variety of reasons.

The Politics of Political Science Methodology York University, 1969: “Fifty student radicals converged on a meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association…to denounce what they called the methodology of political science.” Protesters “walked into the Vanier College dining hall carrying balloons, flowers and signs denouncing [David] Easton’s systems analysis theory.” See:

A Return to Institutions By the 1980s, various scholars were attempting to ‘bring the state back in’ to the centre of their analysis. This form of institutionalism often portrays state actors as having a degree of autonomy and different state structures as influencing political outcomes.

B. Guy Peters, chapter 2 (next week): The 5 ‘I’s:  Institutions,  Interests,  Ideas,  Individuals,  International environment  a bonus, 6 th - interactions