TOPIC 1

Monday, June 23, 2025 5:03 PM

COMPARATIVE  Comparative government and politics is one of the oldest branches of political science.
 Comparative Government and Politics is an important sub-field of the discipline of Political Science. What
POLITICS :
distinguishes this subfield from others such as political theory or international relations is its emphasis on
NATURE AND comparison.
MAJOR  Aristotle is called the father of the Comparative approach. He analysed the 158 constitutions and gave the
APPROACHES classification of Constitution based on the number of rulers and objectives of the governance.
 Later on, Machiavelli also used the Comparative approach and suggested that the Republican form of government
is more suitable to those states where citizens are virtuous.
 Scholars like Montesquieu, Laski, and A.V. Dicey also contributed to the development of the discipline of
comparative politics.
 Comparative Politics focuses on the systematic comparison of countries, with the intention of identifying, and
eventually explaining, the differences or similarities between them with respect to the particular phenomenon
which is being analysed.
 Peter Mair advocates that comparative politics is “concernedÊwithÊdevelopingÊrulesÊandÊstandardsÊaboutÊhowÊ
comparativeÊresearchÊshouldÊbeÊcarriedÊout,ÊincludingÊtheÊlevelsÊofÊanalysisÊatÊwhichÊtheÊcomparativeÊanalysisÊ
operates,ÊandÊtheÊlimitsÊandÊpossibilitiesÊofÊcomparisonÊitself”.
 According to John Blondel, “ComparativeÊPoliticsÊisÊtheÊstudyÊofÊpatternsÊofÊnationalÊGovernmentsÊinÊtheÊ
contemporaryÊworld.”Ê

NATURE OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS

 While the terms “Comparative Politics” and “Comparative Governments” are often used interchangeably, they
carry distinct meanings.
 Traditionally, the comparative study of politics is referred to as “comparative government.” This entails examining
the features and legal authorities of political institutions across different states.
 Comparative government involves analysing the state and other political institutions in terms of their legal powers,
functions, and positions, all within a comparative framework.

CHARACTERISTICS OF COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT

1. Analyse major Constitutions: It places particular importance on the analysis of major constitutions worldwide.
2. Emphasise understanding of various powers and functions: The focus lies on understanding the powers and
functions of different political institutions operating in various countries.
3. Examine features of constitutions and political institutions: The formal study entails organizing and describing
the features of constitutions and political institutions, as well as examining their legal powers.
4. Develop a theory of ideal political institutions: The overarching goal is to develop a theory of ideal political
institutions.
These characteristics contributed to the popularity of comparative government as an area of study at the start of
the 20th century.

POLITICAL ACTIVITY, POLITICAL PROCESS AND POLITICAL POWER

Comparative Politics takes into account all three implications of politics including political activity, political process,
and political power.
 Political Activity:- Political activity encompasses all actions aimed at resolving conflicts or vying for power.
➢ As the primary method of conflict resolution involves the authoritative distribution of values, understanding
this process entails examining how authoritative values are determined and enforced across societies.
➢ From this viewpoint, politics refers to the political process, encompassing the investigation of both formal and
informal structures through which political processes are put into practice.
 Political Process:- The political process receives information and signals from the surrounding environment, which
it then transforms into authoritative values.
 Political Power:- Politics, whether viewed as a contest for power or as a mechanism for resolving conflicts through
legitimate authority, necessitates an examination of power dynamics within society.
➢ Laswell defined politics as the process of determining and distributing power, while
➢ RobertÊDahl emphasized the role of power, rule, and authority in politics.
Therefore, the study of politics inherently involves the analysis of power.

Comparative politics, in turn, entails studying and comparing political activity, processes, and power struggles
across different political systems. It aims to comprehensively analyse political systems and their structures,
functions, infrastructures, and processes through comparative means.
 ADVANTAGES OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS

 Acquiring knowledge: Comparing politics at a micro level offers insights into the political systems of various
countries, facilitating a deeper understanding of our own country’s politics.
 Assessing best practices: Political systems evolve in response to circumstances, and learning from the experiences
of others helps avoid mistakes and adopt successful practices. For instance, democracy, initially developed in
Western nations, has been adopted by many third-world countries, and institutions like the Lokpal draw
inspiration from European models.
 Promoting objectivity: Comparative analysis mitigates criticisms of ethnocentrism and cultural imperialism, making
studies more objective and inclusive.
 Enhancing scientific rigor: The comparative method lends scientific credibility to political studies, enabling more
thorough analysis and comprehension.
 Validating behavioral trends: Comparative politics allows for the verification or rejection of behavioral patterns
among people under specific circumstances.
 Understanding institutional dynamics: Comparative politics provides insights into how different institutions
function within varying contexts and environments.

LIMITATIONS OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS

 Variable complexity: Politics is influenced by numerous factors such as societal norms, historical contexts, climate,
geography, economy, and resources, all operating to varying degrees across different states. Not all factors can be
quantified or observed.
 Information limitations: Access to comprehensive public information is often hindered, as state agencies may filter
or control the release of information. Totalitarian regimes like China and North Korea may heavily restrict or
withhold information altogether, complicating comparison efforts.
 Objectivity challenges: Some social practices may be too culturally or contextually specific to be easily
comprehensible to outsiders, leading to challenges in maintaining objectivity in comparative analysis.
 Dynamic nature of politics: Politics is constantly evolving due to a multitude of factors, rendering comparisons
made today potentially irrelevant tomorrow. This dynamic nature presents a continual challenge in comparative
analysis.

MAJOR APPROACHES OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS

TRADITIONAL APPROACHES TO COMPARATIVE POLITICS

Traditional approaches dominated the field of comparative politics till the emergence of behaviouralism i.e till the
occurrence of the Second World War and with the growth of a large number of independent countries after the
decolonization process.

 These approaches were mainly associated with the traditional outlook of politics which underlined the study of the
state and government.
 These approaches were normative and principled.
 The political philosophers supporting these approaches raised questions such ‘what should be an ideal state?’
 The supporters of the traditional approaches stress various norms such as what ‘ought to be’ or ‘should be’ rather
than ‘what is’.
 Traditional approaches have historically made minimal efforts to establish connections between theoretical
frameworks and empirical research.
 These approaches consider that since facts and values are closely interlinked, studies in Political Science can never
be scientific. and parochial.
 Traditional approaches were ethno-centric (superiority of western political institutions)
 These were limited to the study of constitutions of western countries thereby becoming static in nature as these
approaches were dealing with constitution and not with politics as process.

Traditional Approaches
❖ Philosophical Approach ❖ Historical Approach
❖ Institutional Approach ❖ Legal Approach

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF TRADITIONAL APPROACHES

From the overall study of traditional approaches studied above we can infer that traditional approaches to
comparative politics were subject to criticism by political scholars for various reasons such as:-
❖ Narrow Focus: Traditional approaches often focus solely on formal structures and institutions, neglecting other
crucial aspects of politics such as norms, beliefs, values, and individual agency. This narrow focus limits the
 understanding of political phenomena and fails to capture the complexity of real-world politics.
❖ Lack of Interdisciplinarity: Traditional approaches tend to overlook interdisciplinary perspectives, disregarding
insights from other fields such as sociology, anthropology, and psychology. This limits the ability to
comprehensively analyse political dynamics and behaviour.
❖ Static Analysis: Traditional approaches often provide static analyses of political systems, failing to account for
the dynamic nature of politics and the evolving socio-political contexts within which institutions operate. This can
lead to outdated or incomplete understandings of political phenomena.
❖ Overemphasis on Formalism: Traditional approaches prioritize the study of formal structures and legal
processes, sometimes at the expense of understanding informal institutions and practices that shape political
behaviour. This can result in a superficial understanding of political dynamics and outcomes.
❖ Neglect of International Politics: Some traditional approaches, such as the legal approach, may focus primarily
on national politics and overlook the importance of international relations and global dynamics. This can lead to an
incomplete understanding of contemporary political issues and challenges.

Overall, while traditional approaches have provided valuable insights into comparative politics, they have been
critiqued for their limited scope, lack of interdisciplinary engagement, static analysis, overemphasis on formalism,
and neglect of international politics. As political scholars continue to evolve and innovate in their approaches to
comparative politics, there is a growing recognition of the need for more dynamic, holistic, and interdisciplinary
analysis that capture the complexities of contemporary political systems and processes.

MODERN APPROACHES TO COMPARATIVE POLITICS

 Post-World War II, decolonization led to the emergence of diverse third-world countries. These countries exhibited
differences in theory, practice, text, and context, highlighting the inadequacy of focusing solely on constitutions
and statutes.
 There were also differences in the manner in which the Parliamentary System functioned in both India and Britain.
Western countries also started witnessing the size of alternative systems, e.g., the rise of Fascism and the growth
of Communism.
 Recognizing the need to understand socio-cultural factors, scholars shifted towards a more holistic approach.
 As a result, modern approaches emerged to study the political processes of different countries. The most
important modern approach is the Systems approach.
 The rise of the behavioural movement facilitated the study of modern comparative politics through innovative
techniques.
 Scholars were motivated to explore new areas of study, leading to the development of various new approaches to
overcome the limitations of traditional methods.
 These approaches base their conclusions on empirical evidence gathered through observation and analysis.
 Broadened scope: They extend beyond the examination of political structures and historical analysis.
 Interdisciplinary focus: Modern approaches advocate for interdisciplinary study, incorporating insights from
various fields.
 Scientific rigor: They prioritize the use of scientific methods in political science research and strive to derive
scientifically sound conclusions.

Modern Approaches
❖ Empirical Approach ❖ Political Sociology Approach
❖ Political Economy Approach ❖ System Approach
❖ Structural-Functional Approach

EMPERICAL APPROACH

 Empirical political theory is a branch of political science that focuses on using empirical methods to study political
phenomena.
 It involves gathering and analysing data to test hypotheses and theories about political behaviour, institutions, and
processes.
 This approach often relies on quantitative techniques such as statistical analysis, surveys, experiments, and case
studies to understand patterns and relationships within political systems.
 Empirical political theory aims to provide evidence- based insights into how politics works in practice and to
contribute to a deeper understanding of political dynamics and outcomes.
 Proponents:- Robert Putnam, Theda Skocpol, Hannah Arendt.
 Functions of empirical political theory are as the follows:-
➢ Data Collection: Empirical political theorists gather data from various sources, including surveys, interviews,
government records, historical documents, and experiments. This data could encompass a wide range of political
phenomena, such as voting behaviour, public opinion, policy decisions, political institutions, and international
 relations.
➢ Quantitative Analysis: Empirical political theory often employs quantitative techniques to analyze data
systematically. Statistical methods such as regression analysis, correlation analysis, help researchers identify causal
relationships, predict outcomes, and generalize findings to broader populations.
➢ Qualitative Research: In addition to quantitative analysis, empirical political theorists may also conduct
qualitative research to gain deeper insights into political processes. Qualitative methods such as case studies,
content analysis, and ethnography provide rich descriptions and interpretations of political phenomena, allowing
researchers to explore complex social dynamics and individual experiences.
➢ Theory Building and Refinement: Through rigorous empirical investigation, researchers contribute to the
development and refinement of political theories. By testing hypotheses and evaluating evidence, empirical
political theory helps to clarify theoretical concepts, challenge existing assumptions, and generate new insights
into how political systems function.
➢ Policy Implications: Empirical political research often has practical implications for policymakers, informing
decision-making processes and policy development. By identifying the factors that influence political outcomes
and understanding their effects, empirical political theory can offer evidence-based recommendations for
addressing social, economic, and governance challenges.

SYSTEM APROACH

Key Concepts of System

A system is a set of elements in the state of interaction. These Elements are in a patterned relationship. It is made
up of various subsystems. All the parts of the system are interconnected and interdependent. Changes in one part
will automatically bring Changes in all other parts.

Political system

Here system denotes the political system and the subsystem are-
 Parliament
 Bureaucracy
 Law and Order
 State Assembly etc.

 A system consists of various subsystems and those subsystems can further be treated as a system like a political
system.

 Environment- Environment denotes those factors which are constantly influencing the system. The environment
remains constantly in touch with the system. System and Environment are in a symbiotic relationship
(interdependent). System influences environment and environment influences system i.e., both are in a
continuous state of interaction.
 Boundary- It is in the outer limit of the system. The system is not affected much by the factors that exist beyond
the boundary (the system is rarely affected by outside factors). It means factors existing beyond the boundary do
not require consideration.
 Inputs- The political system receives inputs from the environment. Inputs exist in the form of demand and support.
So, every demand does not enter the political system. It requires substantial support.
 Outputs - Inputs are converted into outputs through the political system. Outputs take the form of policies and
decisions.
 Feedback-Output interacts with the environment and they are flown back into the political system through a
feedback mechanism giving rise to improved inputs.
 Thus, the political system keeps responding to the environment and that is how the political system survives.

Political system The political system reflects the dynamic aspect of politics. It is a broader term than the state.
David Easton defines the political system as the authoritative allocation of values. It means authoritative decisions
are arrived at through the political system.
Ludwig Von Bertallanfy is considered as the earliest advocate of the general systems theory. He utilized this
theory for the study of Biology. Among political scientists, David Easton has been the first to apply this theory to
political analysis.

MODIFICATION OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK BY DAVID EASTON

 David Easton has given an elaborate clarification of demand, support and outputs.

Input functions
 Political socialization and recruitment
 Political communication- It is done by mass media.
 Interest articulation- It is done by pressure groups
 Interest aggregation- It is done by political parties

Based on the above model following conclusions were drawn-

 Democratic systems are highly responsive to demands,
 Democratic systems are highly adaptable,
 Totalitarian systems are less responsive to demands, totalitarian systems regulate the behaviour of people
through coercion
 The level of extraction from people is very high in totalitarian systems.

Factors responsible for the growth of the systems approach

 Growth of behaviouralism
 Process of decolonization- a large number of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America got independence and it
became very difficult to study these countries through traditional approaches.
 Development of systems approach in another discipline, e.g., the concept of the social system developed by
Talcott Parsons.

Basic assumptions of the systems approach

  Scientific understanding of politics is possible only by adopting a systems approach because it reflects a high
level of generalisation.
 Political analysis is possible in a scientific manner.
 Political phenomena cannot be understood in an isolated sense of the term.
 Political reality always remains in a state of flux.
 There always remains a demand for communication and information in the political system.

PROCESS OF SYSTEM APPROACH

David Easton gave the concept of a political system, emphasizing its interconnection with the broader social
environment. Thus he established politics as a system. This perspective underscores that political events cannot be
analyzed in isolation from other societal factors. In other words, influences from various aspects of society, such as
the economy, religion, and others, play a significant role in shaping the political process. The political system
functions within a broader societal context, where various demands arise from different segments of society.
These demands can range from calls for employment reservation to requests for improved working conditions,
minimum wages, transportation, and healthcare facilities. Each demand garners varying degrees of support.
According to Easton, these demands and supports constitute “inputs” received by the political system from the
environment. Government decision-makers assess these inputs and take action on some while disregarding
others. Through a conversion process, these inputs are transformed into “outputs” in the form of policies,
decisions, rules, regulations, and laws. These outputs are then returned to the environment through a feedback
mechanism, generating new demands and perpetuating the cycle.

LIMITATIONS OF EASTON'S MODEL

 It can be applied only to understanding Western Liberal democracies and not to understanding third-world
countries.
 It is a status-quo model (this model does not appreciate change).
 Easton's model talks about the change through the political system. It does not talk about the change in the
political system.
 His definition of the political system assumes the legitimacy of the political system. Hence this model Cannot
explain many issues like the crisis of legitimacy, revolution and frequent changes which are quite common in the
politics of third world countries.
 His political system inherently justifies Western democracies. Hence it cannot be treated as completely a value
value-free
 It treats the political system as a recipient of inputs and as a machinery for conversion of inputs into outputs.
 Traditionalists argue that system approach brings unnecessary complications and jargons. It does not have much
analytical importance.
 Marxists argue that the system fails to provide an accurate explanation even for Western countries, as it tends to
overlook the existence of problems within them.

Hence, this model is not very suitable for the study of third-world countries.The input factor is not very active in
third-world countries. Third-world countries are overdeveloped states, that is state and their apparatuses are
much more powerful and advanced than societies, for example In countries like India, China, and Pakistan state is
shaping the societies.

REASONS FOR MODIFICATION OF SYSTEM APPROACH

The political system model of David Easton does not explain the structures and functions of the political system
elaborately. Hence, the systems approach tries to remove the limitations of Easton's model.
This Following was done by Almond and Powell who identified the following characteristics of the political
system:-
 All political systems have political structures.
 All structures are multi-functional.
 Some functions are performed in all political systems at different frequencies. For example-process of election is a
part of almost all political systems in Western societies and Eastern societies.

Contribution of Almond and Powell: They gave the concept of the evolution of the political system. They have
adopted a developmental approach. They have shown that political systems are not static. It keeps on changing.

STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONAL APPROACH

The structural-functional approach can be seen as stemming from system analysis. These approaches emphasize
 both structures and functions.
❖ Gabriel Almond advocated this approach and defines political system as a unique form of interaction present in
all societies, fulfilling certain specific functions.
❖ The key characteristics of a political system according to Almond include its inclusiveness, interconnection, and
existence of boundaries.
❖ Similar to Easton, Almond contends that all political systems carry out both input and output functions. Almond
identifies the input functions of political systems as political socialization and recruitment, interest articulation and
aggregation, and political communication.
❖ He categorizes governmental output functions into three groups concerning policy-making and implementation:
➢ Rulemaking, ➢ Rule application and ➢ Rule adjudication.

Political modernization is never complete since Almond and Powell have accommodated the concept of political
change so this model has greater utility for studying the politics of developing societies than Easton's model. They
have given special emphasis on input, output and feedback mechanisms in shaping the politics of developing
countries.

POLITICAL POLITICAL ECONOMY APPROACH

ECONOMY
The political economy approach deals with the relationship between economic and political processes. It means the
APPROACH branch of study that deals with the analysis of rulers with respect to economic policies. The political economy
approach also integrates politics, economies, sociology, etc.
POLITICAL In the west, the tradition of political economy starts with Adam Smith. His WEALTH OF NATIONS is considered as the
first textbook. In the east political economy goes back to Ancient India. Kautilya’s ARTHASHASTRA can be treated as
SOCIOLOGY
the first textbook in political economy.
APPROACH Fiscal policies, industrial policies, agricultural policies, and labor policies are all economic matters, with government
members serving as the primary actors. Final decisions are made by the executive branch, often with input from
specialists and advisors. Government approval is required for policy implementation. While these policies fall under
the domain of economics, they are ultimately determined by the government.
The success or failure of economic policies is widely acknowledged to depend on government actions, highlighting
the inseparable link between politics and economics.

The economic approach to the study of politics owes much to the writings of Marx and Engels, who emphasized the
significance of economic factors such as class struggle, increasing impoverishment, and capitalist exploitation.
According to Marx and Engels, politics is fundamentally influenced by economic forces, and without economic
influence, politics lacks independent authority.

Various approaches to Political economy:

There are 2 dominant approaches-
1. Liberal approach:
(a) Laissez faire approach
(b) Welfare model approach

(a) Laissez-faire approach:

 Liberals believe that there should be protection of private property. Individual initiatives must be free from the
donation of the state.
 The liberal approach to political economy can be traced to the times of Adam Smith. Scholars believing in the
theory of Adam Smith can be clubbed together in a Laissez Faire approach i.e., a free market economy approach.
This approach is associated with classical liberals like Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham and David Ricardo, etc.
 According to Adam Smith, there should be less intentions of the state and individuals should be running their
enterprise in a competitive environment. He believes that individualism promotes order and not chaos in the market
economy.
 Individualism believes in competitive market equilibrium.
According to David Ricardo, there should be no Restriction on private investment and the government also should
not intervene in the economy. He believes that the accumulation of capital is the basis of economic expansion.
 In contemporary times, neo-liberals like Milton Friedman, Robert Nozick and Von Hayek talked about
Neoliberalism. In contemporary times, this approach has become very popular.
 It gained currency in the middle of the 1960s when the economy of the USA witnessed a downturn. These scholars
criticized the existing Welfare State model and held this model responsible For the economic downturn of the USA.
The Neo-liberal approach once again became very popular after the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991.

(b) Welfare Approach:

 It is based on the concept of the Welfare State model. It is based on the themes of Keynes and Galbraith.
 Keynes took a pragmatic view in his book on capitalism. In his book The General Theory of Employment, He talked
about giving employment to people to come out of economic depression-like conditions.
 In contemporary times, this approach has been promoted by scholars like Amartya Sen and Joseph Stiglitz (who
are social liberals and welfare economists), who talked about improving the conditions of the poor through state
intervention. They believe that there should be great involvement of Civil Society in formulating the policies of the
state. Everything should not be worked out by only the state and the market. Without the involvement of civil
Society, it is difficult for justice to prevail.

MARXIST PPROACH

There are 2 approaches with respect to political economy: -

(a) Instrumentalist Approach

 The state exists as an instrument of the dominant class in those societies where the class formation is clear-cut.
This approach is represented by scholars like Ralph Miliband.
It is based on the works of Karl Marx.
This approach believes that the state is an instrument of the capitalist class.
According to this approach, the state serves only the interests of the capitalist class.

(b) Relative Autonomy Approach

 This approach is based on Karl Marx's work, 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
In this work Marx has talked about Bonapartism.
This approach is represented by scholars like Nicos Poulantzas.
According to this approach, the state becomes relatively autonomous in those societies in which class formation is
not clear-cut (Also after the revolution the state becomes relatively autonomous). Sometimes the state itself
becomes the dominant class.
This approach is quite useful for analyzing the politics of third-world countries because of the presence of multiple
classes and the existence of different modes of production.
 States in these societies are very powerful.
Scholars like Hamza Alavi have used this approach in his theory of overdeveloped state in which he has talked
about omnipotent and omnipresent states which are relatively autonomous from the capitalist class. Hamza Alavi
has given his theory of the overdeveloped state about the overwhelming influence of the bureaucratic military
complex of Pakistan but this concept has been used by a number of scholars to describe the politics of third-world
countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Scholars such as Pranab Bardhan, Atul Kohli, Rudolph and Rudolph, Francine Frankel, and Gunnar Myrdal have
extensively applied the political economy approach to the study of India. Their analyses have focused on topics such
as land reforms, the green revolution, and neoliberal economic policies.

POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY APPROACH

 Political science and sociology, both being social sciences, often intersect in their study areas.
This approach has gained currency as a result of the growth of Behaviouralism in society.
 This approach studies the interplay of politics and society.
 The primary concern of this approach is to study the pattern of power distribution in society.
 Other associated concerns include- analysis of voting behaviour, issues of legitimacy, and authority of the state.
 This approach is also concerned with political socialization and the existing political culture of society.
 This approach studies the role of political parties, interest groups, pressure groups and the nature of elites, etc.
 The origin of the political sociology approach can be traced to the works of Aristotle, Machiavelli, Montesquieu,
Rousseau, etc.
❖ Aristotle is considered father of political-sociology approach as he explained the social causes behind a regime
change/revolution.
❖ Machiavelli prescribed that the form of govt. depends on the nature of society. If society is corrupt, then the rule
of the prince who rules with the iron hand.
❖ Many political scholars like Easton, Almond MacIver argue that state is more of a social than a political institution.
❖ The political sociology approach emphasize on four major areas, i.e., elite sociology, election study, voting
behaviour and violence.
 Karl Marx has also contributed greatly to the development of this approach and is regarded as the pioneer of
modern political sociology for emphasizing the importance of understanding society’s fundamental structure to
comprehend politics. Marx has also analyzed the distribution of power in society in the context of ownership of
means of production. Marx introduced the base and superstructure model, asserting that politics cannot be studied
in isolation.
 In contrast to the Marxist approach, the Weberian school emerged, led by Max Weber, who challenged the
monocausal explanation provided by Marx.
Scholars like Max Weber have also contributed greatly to the development of this approach. His concept of authority
and the nature of societies are closely related. He has analyzed societies based on the nature of authority for
example- The concept of patriarchalism, bureaucracy and charismatic authority.

Different Perspectives
1. Feminist Perspective  According to feminists, power is distributed in unequal terms in society. Power is held by
male members of society. Feminists believe that this unequal distribution of power in society leads to the
exploitation of females.
2. Elitist Perspective  According to this perspective, power always remains in the hands of elites in society. No
society can be a completely egalitarian society. Even in the case of Socialist countries power is always being held into
the hands of elites. The elitist perspective is associated with the works of Pareto, Mosca, C. Wright Mills, etc.
3. Communitarian Perspective  Communitarians believe that power is neither an individual possession nor the
possession of classes rather it is a feature of the community.
4. Marxist perspective  Power is always held by capitalists. Even the state, judiciary, police and educational system
work at the behest of the capitalist.
5. Liberal Perspective  Liberals believe that power is obtained through merit. According to liberals, Liberal societies
are open societies and liberal societies work on the principle of equality of opportunity.  Liberals believe that
power is always achieved in a liberal society. It is never ascriptive (By birth) and political power is held by the
majority of people in liberal societies, for eg the mechanism of regular elections ensures that power remains in the
hands of the people.

Major Limitations of the Political Sociology Approach

 The role of important institutions like legislature, executive and judiciary gets neglected in the political sociology
approach.
 The political sociology approach analyzes political Phenomena dependent on political factors.
 The political sociology approach looks like a subsidiary of sociology.
 Critics argue that political sociology excessively relies on society, leading to fears that political science may lose its
distinct identity and become overshadowed by sociology.
 While society influences politics, politics also shapes society, as exemplified by the transformation of Indian
society under leaders like Pandit Nehru.
 Political sociology often overlooks the role of the economy in shaping politics, leading to the emergence of the
political economy approach in comparative politics.
 The substantial growth of research in political sociology has transformed it into a hybrid discipline rather than just
an approach within political science.

Policy formulation and legislative decisions are influenced by sociological research. Studies conducted by sociologists
on topics such as crime, divorce, juvenile delinquency, slum conditions, and urbanization provide valuable insights to
government officials and lawmakers. In modern welfare states, authorities cannot afford to ignore sociological
research on these issues without risking their own effectiveness and stability.

Contribution of major thinkers in the Comparative Politics:

1. Aristotle:- In his renowned work, “The Politics,” he contrasts various “constitutions” by introducing a well-known
typology that considers two factors: the number of rulers (one, few, many) and the character of the political regime
(virtuous or corrupt).
2. Almond and Verba:- Almond and Verba initiate the initial extensive cross-national survey on attitudes to explore
the significance of political culture in upholding the stability of democratic governments.
3. Arend Lijphart:- He is a political scientist specializing in comparative politics, electoral systems, democratic
institutions, and the intersection of ethnicity and politics.
4. Theda Skopcol:- Theda Skopcol compares the major revolutions of France, Russia and China: three basically similar
events which took place in three very different contexts. Main objective of Skopcol was to find possible similarities
which might help explain the occurrence of political revolution.

Concluding Remarks:

Comparative politics involves the systematic analysis and comparison of political institutions, from constitutions to
executives, parliaments, parties, and electoral laws. Unlike journalistic reporting, which focuses on individual
countries, comparative politics seeks to uncover patterns, processes, and regularities across political systems. It
aims to identify trends, analyse changes, and develop general hypotheses that explain these trends. This approach
requires diligent research, critical thinking, thorough scholarship, and clear, balanced writing, devoid of personal
biases or philosophical agendas.

Questions asked:

1. What are the crucial functions of empirical political theory in comparative politics? (2023)
2. Discuss the main limitations of the comparative method to the study of political science. (2022)
3. Discuss the political economy approach to the comparative analysis of politics. (2021)
4. Examine the significance of comparative method in political analysis. Discuss its limitations.
5. Explain the political sociology approach in the field of comparative politics and discuss its limitations. (2019) (2017)
6. Critically examine the Marxist aspect of political economy approach to the study of comparative politics. (2016)
7. What are the major approaches of comparative politics? Explain in brief the political economy approach to the
study of comparative politics. (2015)
8. “Structural-Functional approach to political analysis focuses more on status-quoism, and less on change.”
Elucidate. (2011)
9. How is the modern comparative politics approach different from the traditional legal institutional approach?
10. Comment: Traditional Approach and its significance. (2010) (2003)