COMPARATIVE POLITICS

Comparative Inquiry:
- Political science has its beginning when an observer notes that another people is not governed as we are and asks the
question, why? (Rose 1991)
- An awareness of diversity provides the starting point for comparative inquiry (Hague and Harrop 2001)
- Comparison is inherent in all science, including the social sciences (Lor, 2011)
- Without comparisons to make, the mind does not know how to proceed (tocqueville, 1830)
- Comparative Politics is important in order to appreciate the nuances as the way to inform us as to how we go about our
intervention.
- Stages in the development of CP did not unfold in an orderly and episodic manner + a field acutely in dissent because it is in
transition from one style of analysis to another (Apter & Eckstein, 1963)
- CP existed long before it became a recognized subfield of the modern discipline of political science (Daalder, 1993)

Comparative Politics Timeline: (by sir rej)

1. Aristotle (384 - 322 BCE)

Subject: STATE as the highest of all communities
Approach: inductive, empirical, historical

2. Machiavelli and the Renaissance

Subject: STATE as ‘work of art’
Approach: inductive, empirical, humanist

3. Montesquieu and the Enlightenment

Subject: right GOVERNMENT as a matter of sociology and ecology (social laws)
Approach: inductive, logical, observational

4. Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Century

Subject: CONSTITUTION —--> new world —-> POLITICS
Approach: behavioral, interdisciplinary, democratic-developmental, structural-functionalist
Prominent Scholars:

1. Baron de Montesquieu
- Emphasis on human political experience and pluralism of causation
- comparativism

2. Alexis de Tocqueville (1805 - 1859)

- Method of comparison
- Without comparison, the mind does not know how to proceed

3. Devin Griffiths
- Comparative method:
- Crucial to the history of humanities
- Comparison and analogy
- Network of affiliated practices, not a stable object
- Internalization and reformulation by social science
- Active network of research practices, interdisciplinary produces similarity

4. Gerardo Munck
- 19th: cp as a distinct field of polsci
- 20th: cp as an international enterprise
- Cp is punctuated by two revolutions: behavioral revolution + scientific revolution
- Standard for research in cp is based largely from US academia; APSA in 1903

PHASES IN COMPARATIVE POLITICS

Jean Blondel’s Comparative Government

3 main phases in the study of CP:

1. Constitutionalist (Aristotle - 1900s)
2. Behavioralist (1940a - 1960s)
 3. Institutionalist (1970s -)

Comparative Government - J Blondel

1969’s Comparative Government: An introduction

Gerardo Munck:

Politically Defining Moments

Behavioral Revolution 1921 - 1966 / POSC = Comparative Government

1921: publication of a manifesto for a new science of politics by Prof. Charles Merriam;
1952: creation of SSRC’s Committee on Comparative Politics chaired by Gabriel Almond
Sociology: dominant metatheory

Post Behavioral Period 1967 - 1988 / Bringing Back formal institutions

1967: publication of “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments” by Lipset and Stein Rokkan
1968: publication of “Political Order in Changing Societies’ by Samuel Huntington
1976: publication of “Parties and Party Systems” by Giovanni Sartori
Behavioralists’

2nd Scientific Revolution 1989 - present / Three pronged New Agenda

STATUS QUO:
Present-day comparativists are sitting at different tables, eating from different menus, and not speaking to each other - not even to
acknowledge their common inheritance from the same distinguished ancestors. (ALMOND, 1990)

REALIZATIONS
Apter, David & Eickstein, Harry. (eds.) (1963)
EVOLVING - Today, CP is characterized by nothing so much as variety, criticisms, and disagreement.
DIVERSITY - Disagreement and divergences are great in regard to absolutely basic preconceptions and
orientations.
PLURALITY - Tasks are so many and so difficult as to be unlikely to achieve satisfying results.

Philippe C. Schmitter (2009) - That the future of comparative politics should diverge to some degree.
#crossroads.

CONSIDERATIONS on the study of COMPARATIVE POLITICS:

● cp to continue for a foreseeable future to bear major responsibility for the objective description of
processes and events in ‘other countries’
● best research method: comparison between ‘real existing polities’
● most unlikely for cp to taper in a single peak/amongst distinctive paths.

#crossroads

en do we know complexification?

COMPLEXIFICATION (towards the left of the Genealogical Tree)

Simplification (towards the right of the GT)

Institutionalism (at the center of the GT)

Institutionalist:
- adding more ‘neo-neo-neo’ prefixes as it permutes into more specialized approaches.
- the permutation is there to established specialization
- to add or evolve into a new theoretical framework that better explains the phenomena at hand
- to permute is to maintain their relevance
Complexification:
 - (1) accept for fewer and less restrictive initial assumptions
- (2) are convinced that adequate micro-foundations in the present world context can not only be based in
individual persons
- (3) choose to rely upon ‘reasonableness’ rather than rationality
- (4) consider that the usual fallacies of composition can be converted into novel ‘laws of composition’ (makes
sense of all the information and convert it into the laws of composition)
- (5) have a healthy respect for ‘real’ data
- (6) insist upon endogenizing as many potentially causal variables as possible even those notoriously difficult to
measure such as ‘preferences’
- (7)
Simplification:
- limited initial assumptions + exclusive reliance on individualistic ‘micro foundations’

Coping Strategy

How to address noisy and messy world =

● Increased Complexity - affecting production of similar effects across units with equivalent measures being compared
● Increased Interdependence - affecting making independent the units being compared in terms of cause effect relationship
● Complex Interdependence - affecting determination of independent cause and independent political capacity through
compound condition

“COMPARATIVE POLITICAL ANALYSIS, IF IT HAS TO REMAIN SIGNIFICANT, PRODUCTIVE AND INNOVATIVE IN THE
FUTURE, HAS TO REFLECT TO THE ‘REAL EXISTING’ ENVIRONMENT FROM WHICH ITR SHOULD DRAW ITS
OBSERVATIONS AND TO WHICH IT SHOULD REFER ITS FINDINGS.” (SCHMITTER, 2016)
Challenge
Apter, David & Eckstein, Harry. (eds.) (1963)
FOCUS AND SIMPLIFICATION
What are we to concentrate upon? (the state)

The State and the Political System

State:
> Poultantzas
● Undecipherable mystery
● Modern concept
○ Institutionalized power - power: capacity of a social class to realize its specific objective interests
○ Material condensation (locus) of the relationship of forces among classes (expressed within a state in a specific form)
>Solution
● Refers to its functions
>is equal to state apparatus
>institutions - the government, administration, military, police, judiciary, sub-central government and parliamentary assemblies
>state elite - those who occupy leading positions in institutions
Only a sub-system of a broader political system

Political System:
>Easton’s Political System Properties
● Units = political actions
● Boundaries = environment
● Inputs = demands, support
● Outputs = authoritative decisions (policy)
● Differentiation
● Integration
>institutions (parties and pressure groups, which are of major importance in the political process, and which vitally affect the
operation of the state system)
System Approach
>System
● Greek word “synistanai” = to bring together or combine
● A set or assemblage of interconnected, interdependent things that form a complex whole \

Systems Theory of Politics (Heywood, 2002)

>political system as a self-regulating mechanism responding to ‘inputs’ (demand and supports) by issuing authoritative decisions or
‘outputs’ (policies)

Implication: the political system will tend towards long-term stability as the outputs of government have brought into line with the input
and pressures place upon it (integration)

DAVID EASTON’S MODEL:

- Input is dependent on the supply of information by
the people and those information will be used to
process what is happening within the political
system
 ALMOND AND POWELL’S MODEL:
- a structural-functional approach to understanding how
political systems operate. This model focuses on the
functions that political systems perform, regardless of the
type of government (democracy, autocracy, etc.).
- views a political system as an open system, interacting
with its environment, and emphasizes the dynamic
processes that keep the system functioning. It is used to
compare political systems across different societies.

REMIGIO AGPALO’S MODEL

- His model is often referred to as the "Pantayong Pananaw"
approach, which translates to "from us, for us, about us." Agpalo argued
that traditional Western political models do not fully capture the
complexities of Filipino political culture, which is heavily influenced by
personalism, familism, and patron-client relationships. His model
highlights the importance of "pangulo" (leader), where strong,
charismatic leadership plays a central role in the political system. Agpalo
viewed Filipino politics as being both formal and informal, where personal
relationships, alliances, and networks heavily influence political decisions
and governance. In essence, his model sought to create a political
framework that was rooted in Filipino culture and history, rather than
relying solely on Western concepts.
REFLECTIONS
>variety of influences from the environment
>existence of influences is a given no matter the condition of the environment
>generalizing / systematic method is necessary

STATE AND ITS RELEVANCE IN CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY:

Does State Politics [still] Matter?

STATE NOMENCLATURE (R.M Maclver The Modern State, 1926)

● State… acts through law as promulgated by a government endowed to this end with coercive power, and maintains within a
community territorially demarcated the universal external condition of social order

POLITICS, POLITICAL SYSTEM, AND STATE (T. Bottomore Political Sociology, 1979)
● Politics and Political Activity
○ Struggles for power among individuals and groups in relation to their own interests and to the general regulation and
orientation of collective life - are found in all societies (even the most primitive)
● Every society has some sort of political system
○ A body of rules and practices which constitutes the framework within such struggles normally take place, but not all
societies have a state - that which requires a separate and distinct political apparatus

WHAT ARE STATE?

● It is easier to define what a state is not, than what it is.
● State is NOT the same as:
○ Government
○ Regime
○ Nation
○ Public sector
○ Political system
○ State apparatus
ON THE MEDIEVAL ORIGINS OF MODERN STATE (J. Strayer, 1975)
● ‘Stateless societies’:
○ Pre-state societies
○ Collapsed states
● A state exists chiefly in the hearts and minds of its people; if they do not believe it is there, logical exercise will bring it to life.
● How can something that exists only in hearts and minds have such power over our lives (including the power of life and
death? What is the basis of state power?)

BASES OF STATE POWER:

● Max Weber (1919): a state is an institution which (successfully) claims to exercise a monopoly of the legitimate use of
physical force within a given territory
● Argues that it is a force which constitutes the primary (not the only) attribute which makes the state a state.
● Implication: administrative apparatus where administration means the extraction of resources, control and coercion, and
maintenance of the political, legal, and normative order of society
● We can define states by looking at what they are (a structural approach), but it may be more useful to think about what they
do (a functional approach)
○ Talcott Parsons
○ David Easton
○ Gabriel Almond
○ Bingham Powell
○ Remigio Agpalo

PERSPECTIVE OF THE STATE (HEYWOOD, 2002)

IDEALIST
● Hegel’s 3 moments of social existence
○ Family (particular altruism)
○ Civil society (universal egoism)
○ State (universal altruism - an ethical community underpinned by mutual sympathy)
● Limitation: fosters uncritical reverence for the state
FUNCTIONALIST
● Focus on the role or purpose of state institutions
● Central function of a state is the maintenance of social order
● Maximized by modern Marxists, the state ensures the survival of the capitalist system
● Limitations: it associates any institution that maintains order with state itself

ORGANIZATIONAL
● Set of institutions that are recognizably ‘public’ in that they are responsible for the collective organization of social existence
and funded at the public’s expense
● Modern notion of state started in the Treaty of Westphalia
● Features of state:
○ Sovereignty
○ Public
○ Has legitimacy
○ Instrument of domination
○ Is a territorial association

LIMITATIONS OF STATE - CENTERED ANALYSIS

● Excludes analysis of pre-states
○ The exclusive definition of the modern state
● State refers to the officials of government or to the government itself and not to the political aspect of the whole community
● Inadequacy of the state concept (i.e thru denotation instead of connotation)
○ Unsatisfactory definition of state
○ Implies that POSC is interested in studying a particular type of organization and NOT the activity that is expressed in
variety of institution

WHAT DO STATES DO? (Allen T. and Thomas A. Poverty and Development 1992)
● Conduct peaceful and warlike relations with other states
● Claim a monopoly over the use of force within their boundaries
● Can provide identity and cohesion through processes of legitimation
● Act as agents within society and structure the actions of other agents
 ● Sustain relationships with other spheres of activity and groups and classes - of which the relationship with the economy is
most important
● States are not unified organizations but rather ensembles of institutions and processes which are extremely various,
conflictual and complex

WHAT STATES CANNOT DO?

● One important aspect of the conflictual/ contradictory/ complex/ dynamic nature of states is that they never achieve
completely what they claim in Weber’s definition:
○ The state 'asserts a monopoly of legitimate force which does not (and cannot) have’
● Focuses its activities within a given territory and upon members of a particular nation because its boundaries are challenged
and its national identity contested
● It claims a monopoly of legitimacy only because this legitimacy is contested
● On the one hand it is autonomous and separate from public rather than private; on the other hand the universality of its
compulsory jurisdiction means that it permeates and structures the whole of society

COMPARATIVE POLITICS
● Refers to the subject matter, a field or specialty within the academic study of Political Science
● Method or approach to the study of politics
● The study of foreign countries or a plurality of countries
● It pertains to the family of strategies and techniques with advanced understanding within the field
● It is a ‘master strategy’ for drawing inference about causation in any area of study by uncovering the relationship of cause and
effect
● A reawakened interest in large-scale comparisons, a relatively broad conception of the nature of politics, what is relevant to
politics, and a growing emphasis upon solving middle-range theoretical problems concerning the determinants of certain
kinds of political behavior and the requisites for certain kinds of political institutions (Eckstein, 1963)
● That in the earlier consensus, the comparative method was seen as an approach to the testing of theory
● That today, theory and testing are now seen parts of an interactive process within the comparative method (Laitin, 2000)
● Comparative Politics falls into the category of scientific research the most due to its reference to methodology.
● Comparative Politics cannot make causal explanations based on the comparative method alone. Like all other methods,
the comparative methods depend on pre-existent relevance criteria, which are provided by analytical concepts, hypotheses,
and theories. (Jahn, n.d.)
● As a method of study, comparative politics is premised on comparison. As a subject study, comparative politics focuses on
understanding and explaining political phenomena that take place within a state, society, country, or political system.
● Comparative politics is, appropriately enough, concerned with political phenomena. It is not only characterized but defined
by a comparative method of analysis (Lim, 2010).
● Definitely a method, not just a convenient term symbolizing the focus of research interest.
● One of the basic scientific methods, not the scientific method
● A method of discovering empirical relationships among variables, not a method of measurement
● A broad-gauge, general method, not a narrow, specialized technique
● A basic research strategy, not a mere tactical research (Lijphart, 1971)
● The potentially paralyzing or distracting divisions among comparativists, which hamper progress in the field, will only be
overcome in as much as comparativists appreciate both the depth of the roots of comparative politics in a humanistic
tradition and the vital importance of its scientific aspirations (Munck, 2006)
● Conscious desire to move away from traditional concern with political institutions towards preoccupation with political and
social developments generally and within democratic systems in particular (Daalder, 1993)