Comparative Politics

Competitive politics is a sub-discipline of political science with a goal to develop perspectives of similarities and differences between domestic political systems.

As old as pol sc. Aristotle -Father of Pol Sc and Father of Comparative Politics 

Comparison b/w Domestic Political systems 

---

Traditional comparative politics (TCP)

• Very old. Also called Legal institutional Approach
• Aristotle had studied 158 constitutions to determine the best politik. 
• Machiavelli compared societies and suggested that democracy should be only where people are virtuous.
• Focus : Western countries
• Non western world - colonised; no independent system 
• Traditional Approach : Legal Insti approach 
• which involved comparison between institutions like J, E, L and the constitutions.
• Limitations
• Parochial - narrow in nature and scope
• Ethnocentric 
• Ppl outside Barbarians
• Civilizing mission - white man's burden
• Textual in nature
• Study of constitutions 
• No study of Pol process
• Static
• Study of Comparative Govt rather than comparative politics 
• Essentially non comparative as - Culture,Economic dev,Pol dev --all same 
• Descriptive and less analytical 
• No value neutrality, No quantification

• Significance 
• Collected rich data to build MCP
• Led to Evolution of approaches like Str. Fnctl Approach 
• Practical utility 
• Normative prescriptions to establishment of new instis 
• Recent times - revival  in Institutional approach - 
• Emergence of New Institutionalism(NI) - because of Failure of BA (brought Pol sc to sociology). 
• Thada Skocpol called for bringing the state back in.
• NI evolved into three directions- Sociological approach (developed by March & Olsen) , HA , Rational choice school (SAHARA)

---

---

Modern Comparative politics (MCP)

• After WW2, two development  - behavioralism and emergence of post colonial societies.
• Non Western countries - traditional model of studying the constitution won’t do . hence
• Because constitutionalism does not exist -
• Difference in Theory and practice 
• Extraconstitutional factors
• PGs
• Culture
• Nature of society 
• Level of modernisation 
• Various new methods —> 

David Easton  Systems Approach  Book- A system analysis of political life, 1965 (Easton’s Input output Model)  Origin of systems theory - result of behavioural revolution which emerged out of  dissatisfaction with the traditional methods & need to introduce scientific methods  General systems theory-biology -organs, envt   State is a static concept, so focus on political sys as it tells the process  System- set of subsystems effecting the political system in an envt with a boundary     Utility  Better org of data,Understand devpg areas, Address fundamental weakness of TCP (static, non-comparative, normative ), Led to later models like Str-Fnctl approach  Critics  Traditionalists -no analytical relevance. Just cosmetic changes. Unnecessary complication by bringing jargon. Marxists -Biased to West,West as ideal,Not Value free approach-non universalist, Others imperfect-Conspiracy against west, Status quoist  Conclusion  System approach shows the need to go beyond the study of constitutional and to understand the envt factors shaping the pol system  Kaplan used the system theory for IP

Gabriel Almond and B Powell (Almond ke structure me power hai) Structural/Functional Approach  Book- Comparative politics: a developmental approach,1967 Influenced by David Easton In/op model Lucian pie - Pol dev - functional specialisation  Good —>Diff political systems are at diff stages of pol development  Advantages  Diff pol systems at diff stages of dev  both for advanced and dvpg countries  Conceptual framework for collection and organisation of data - Behavioural movement   Detailed view of str and fn  Addresses the short comings of Systems approach( too general, not universalist, status quoist) More dynamic view of political system Critic -Traditionalist and Marxist - same as Systems approach.

Political Sociology  SM Lipset - study between society and politics  Aristotle - FoPS - Revolutions Machiavelli- govt is dependent on society. If corrupt society- Rule with Iron Hands. otherwise democracy. Marx -  Fo Modern PS To understand politics ==> understand classes, econ str  Gramsci - civil society- integral state Weber  Critique of Marx  Econ str as basic-monocausal explanation  Protestant ethics and spirit of capitalism  2 classes as cap advances Proliferation  Capitalism - Most rational Concept- Ideal Types,Authority,Bureaucracy,Pol Parties Caste, class, PGs, Pol parties, religion, ethnicity- Indian -  Andre Beteille studied caste, Chris Jaffrelot studied RSS. Paul studied Religion . YoYa- Studied India's electoral behavior Mukulika banarjee -studied voting pattern Not arm chair theories - integrates behavioural approach  Most relevant - developing areas  Social Heterogeneity Allows adaptation to social context  Theda Skocopol - to bring the state back in  --> Thus neoinstitutionalism started. Lack of enthu, Danger to pol sc, Becoming a sub disciple of sociology  Flourishing as a sub-discipline in sociology  Demerits Input Society which affects politics but politics affects society also

---

Political Economy Approach 

• In east is as old as  Kautilya.  (most important obligation of the state is to secure the material well being of the people)
• Study of economic policies of the state. Modern origin in west in Adam smith
• Gunnar Myrdal : Decisions of economics are not taken in vacuum of politics 
• Useful : Developing countries
• Combines - normative and scientific. Quantitative and qualitative.
• Policy Science : Use quantitative data and also suggest what should the economic policy of the state 
• School of thoughts*-
• Classical & utilitarian approach - Adam smith, Ricardo, Bentham
• Marxist approach - Marx, Lenin, Engels, Rosa luxenboorg
• Neo Marxist -
• Dependency school -AG Frank, Samir Ameen
• structuralist school - Hamza Alvi
• Welfare economics school - Keynes, Galbrith
• Neo Liberal School - Hyak, Nozick, Jagdish Bhagwati, Arvind Pangariya
• Public choice school - (Min choice min corruption) - James Buchanan
• Disadvantage - Just focused on economic factors and policies.

Adam Smith  Father of Modern PE Wealth of Nations PE - Science of statesman to bring prosperity to the nation  Critic of Mercantilism  Supporter of Lassez Faire State	Marx Critique of PE of Adam Smith Will bring wealth only to few and not nation as a whole  2 schools Instrumentalist Structural - Hamza Alavi - to understand the Political economy of Pak	Amartya Sen  Dev strategy of India and China  Praised China - invested in human devpt

Gunnar Myrdal Asian Drama Nature of Indian state - soft state - as unable to punish the law breakers - land reforms	Atul Kohli Crisis of Governability Due to inability to implement land reforms	Useful : Analytical Understanding the flaws of the development model and making prescriptions Academic + Practical Significance Finds utility in other social sciences as well
		Disadvantages : Normative Limited to few cases - wide variables Focusses on outputs - public policy, without inputs - pol mobilisation Economic reductionism - Too much focus on econ policy May not be objective as scholars might use certain examples to prove their points

---

Political Culture Approach (pol culture as a determinant of comparison) SPH - Clash of Civilisations, FW Riggs  - Prismatic societies  Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba  the Civic Culture  Influenced By-Eastons inout Output,Webers Ideal Types Ideal Types of culture - Parochial - Tribals (when people neither influence input nor output ) -In Andman Subject-pol culture(When people matter only at output) - india till 80-90s Participant - West(people influence input and output both) - Switzerland In particular, Janlokpal Civic Culture - balance -most conducive for democracy. Combination of Parochial+Subject + Participant. Excessive participant culture is not good.

---

More Approaches

Political Development  Purpose- Study of developing areas Lucian Pie ( share in development is called pie) Political development means development of democracy (don's confuse with economic development) 3 Parameters- Equality of participation  Capacity of state to enforce laws(Soft State /Asian Drama)  Differentiation - functional specialisation -how specialised the bodies are in state(Military Bureaucratic Oligarchy - HA/Pak ODS)  How close to western liberal democracy  India, Pak  Criticism by Marxist- same as system approach.	Political decay  Samuel P Huntington  Development trap when all dimensions do not develop equally Mismatch in Pol Participation  Level of Institutionalisation  De-Institutionalisation  Decline of Parliament  Indira Gandhi	Political Modernisation  Samuel P Huntington + Edward Shils Since Pol Development was ethno centric and biased. Compare -Scale of Modernisation  Industrialisation  Urbanisation  Secularisation  Rationalisation  Modernisation ==> Democracy (makes even this approach not value neutral)  (hence China- developed and should move towards democracy- Exception) Political modernisation results in  Mobilisation of ppl  Growth of consciousness  Nation Building  If modernisation is taken as bases of comparison, then ideological dimension looses its importance - End of Ideology

---

Changing nature of State in comparative politics-

Capitalist economies -(G7) Laissez faire --> Welfare state --> Neo Liberal --> Social liberal Rise of right in UK (brexit), USA(trump), France, Netherlands  --Fear of Neo Fascism Rise of Left as well - France, Greece, Britain, Canada

Socialist Economies -  Started with hope of State less, Dictatorship of proletariat --> Dictatorship of Communist party --> 3rd wave of democracy (samuel P Huntington) --> going back to authoritarianism, semi authoritarianism. -->Neo Fasist authoritarian trends. tightening of control in china. No change in dictatorial trend in N Korea. Rise of socialist parties in Latin America (Venezuela, Bolivia)

Developing countries- Global south. Post colonial countries. Suffer from colonial legacy in admin, economy,culture. Problems of mass poverty, deprivation. F W Riggs -calls them -prismatic societies (they are under development trap)(political decay- SPH). Gunnar Myrdal -Soft State.  (tharoor calls india a developed nation is advanced state of decay) Neo Marxist call them - as Peripheries (Bourgeoisie sitting in core) Hamza alvi - Over developed state. With the exception of India as 'Island of democracy', in rest democracy remains too fragile.

Advanced Countries- Global north  OECD countries. Advanced industrial states. Imperial power in past. Have dominance in politics, economics, culture, ideological sphere in current also. Marxist - core economies, Drain of wealth is continuing. Since 2001- Decline in hegemony of west and rise of rest. 2008-finanical crisis created political crisis - Rise of Neo-rightist, Neo-fascist. Migrant crisis, Trans national terrorism & so called Islamophobia Conclusion- We can say that these countries are also in the state of transition.