- Learning objectives (bullet-point list of brief items)



Political Systems and Their Rules

I. Learning Objectives

The three overarching goals of this chapter are for students to:

• understand key concepts related to regime types, constitutions, and levels of government

• apply these concepts to the TIC countries to appreciate the meaning and significance of each concept, as well as to understand similarities and differences among these countries

• employ these concepts and examples from the TIC countries in (in-class) critical thinking exercises related to the issues at hand

Related to the three goals above are several more specific objectives, which are grouped below according to their place in chapter.

Regarding the objectives in each group, students should be able apply the concepts at hand to the TIC countries, as well as complete critical thinking exercises that require mastery of these concepts and illustrations from the TIC countries.

Political Institutions

• understand the terms ‘institutions’ and ‘political institutions’

Regime Types

• understand the three ideal types of ‘regimes’: ‘democracy,’ ‘totalitarianism,’ and ‘authoritarianism’

• understand the main attributes and sub-types of each regime-type

The Constitution

• understand how constitutions serve as the ‘rules of the game’ for political systems

• understand related terms, such as ‘rule of law’ and ‘constitutionalism’

Levels of Government

• understand the distinction between ‘unitary’ and ‘federal’ arrangements

• understand related themes, such as ‘devolution’ and local government

• understand the advantages and disadvantages of federal versus unitary arrangements, as well as the use of devolution or other forms of decentralization

• understand the strengths and weaknesses of the theoretical models presented in this chapter, including systems theory, states and social revolutions, rational choice new institutionalism, and veto points theory

II. Chapter Outline

1. Introduction

• Chapter objectives

• The chapter opens with the story of a joke told by the citizens of the Soviet Union. This joke reminds us that the way political institutions work in practice may differ significantly from the official “rules of the game.”

2. Political Institutions

-Institutions may be conceptualized as having both formal and informal components. ‘Political institutions’ are defined as “governing organizations or other organized groups seeking to shape political outcomes, such as interest groups and political parties.”

3. Regime Types

-Regimes may be defined as types of political systems formed by the coming together of a particular collection of political institutions. This section examines three ideal types of regimes: democracy, totalitarianism, and authoritarianism. The final part of this section examines semiauthoritarianism/semidemocracy, which combines elements of the ideal types.

• Democracy

-This section looks at some of the defining features of a ‘democracy,’ as well as several variants of this regime type.

o Selection of Government Officials through Free and Fair Elections

-This section explains the nature of ‘free and fair’ elections

o The Balance of Majority Rule and Minority Protection

-This section draws on insights of James Madison and Robert Dahl and argues that democracies temper the principle of majority rule to protect the interests of ‘minorities.’

o Limitations on Government Action

-This refers to the constitutional limits placed on governments to protect individual liberties (so-called ‘negative rights).

o Variants of Democracy

-This section introduces the notion that democracies can take different forms, especially regarding the nature of the relationship between the executive and legislature. These specific forms of democracy are examined in subsequent chapters. This section then draws on the work of Arend Lijphart, who divides these specific types of democracy into two varieties: ‘majoritarian democracy’ and ‘consensus democracy.’ In contrast, Dahl distinguishes among four types (models) of democracy: ‘European,’ ‘Westminster,’ ‘American,’ and ‘Latin American.’

• Totalitarianism

-This brief introductory section cites Nazi Germany and the USSR under Stalin as examples of this ideal type.

o Features of Totalitarianism

-This draws on the work of Hannah Arendt, who conceptualizes this system as one that prevents the ‘atomization’ of society – meaning that individuals are prevented from forming autonomous groups that might counter the goals of the dominant political party. Carl Friedrich and Zbigniew Brzezinski identify six basic features of totalitarianism: official ideology, single political party, terror, control of communication, control over the means of force in society, and a command economy.

o Variants of Totalitarianism: Fascism and Communism

-“Fascism is a form of totalitarianism that emphasizes racial, religious, or ethnic superiority and engages in militarism…. Communism is a variant of totalitarianism that emphasizes collective ownership of the means of production in an effort to end the exploitation of the working class inherent in capitalism.”

• Authoritarianism

- This brief introductory section cites Spain under Francisco Franco (1939-1975) and Chile under Augusto Pinochet Ugarte (1973-1988) as examples of this ideal type.

o Features of Authoritarianism

-The five basic features of this ideal type are a dominant leader or small group of leaders, limited political participation, autonomy of society from state control, lack of an ideology, and limited control over the economy.

o Variants of Authoritarianism

-This section draws on the works of Juan Linz and Guillermo O’Donnell. Three variants are described in this section: military authoritarianism, party authoritarianism, and bureaucratic authoritarian systems.

• Semiauthoritarianism/Semidemocracy

-This section discusses the possibility of hybrid types, which may be more or less democratic depending on the specific case at hand.

• TIC Sections

o Regime Type in the UK, Germany, France, and India

▪ Regarding Lijphart’s ideal types, the UK approximates the majoritarian system; the German system embodies the consensus variant, and France and India fall in between.

▪ The UK: “Westminster” democracy; highly majoritarian

▪ Germany: Consensus democracy; combination of coalition gov’t.s, federalism, and corporatism

▪ France: Aspects of majoritarian and consensus democracy; strong executive

▪ India: Parliamentary democracy; system has evolved from one-party dominant to multiparty

▪ Mexico: Party-authoritarian system until recently; today an unconsolidated democracy

▪ Brazil: Has alternated between democracy and military authoritarianism; remains an unconsolidated democracy with traditional elites maintaining significant power

▪ Nigeria: Combination of majoritarian and consensus democracy; has alternated between democracy and military authoritarianism; democratic status is increasingly unclear

-This section focuses on the changing nature of regime types in these countries.

► - “Old Institutionalism” in Political Science Had Focused on Describing Institutions

► The Behavioralism Movement That Began in the 1950s Focused on Explaining Political Outcomes

▪ David Easton proposed that all political systems translate inputs (demands and supports) into outputs (policy)

▪ The system responds to changes in supports and demands

▪ Easton’s model pays little attention to the design of the institutions themselves

▪ Mexico and Easton’s Approach

▪ In the latter part of the twentieth century, changes in demands and supports put pressure on the government of Mexico

▪ Resulted in policy changes, including the political liberalization of the 1970s-1990s

▪ Even without looking “inside” the Mexican system, Easton’s framework helps explain the changes that led to the PRI losing its dominance over Mexican politics

▪ Russia: Democratic following collapse of USSR; creeping authoritarianism; semiauthoritarian system today

▪ China: Under Mao Zedong, often considered a totalitarian system; since Deng Xiaoping, more like a party-authoritarian system

▪ Iran: Theocracy; under former President Khatami, attempts at reform; under President Rouhani, more attempts at reform, but so far, unsuccessful because of Ayatollah Khamenei.

-These countries all fall far from the democratic ideal.

► -Theda Skocpol’s 1979 Book Set the Stage for a New Focus on Political Institutions

▪ Skocpol saw state institutions as an important independent variable, not a “black box” like in Easton’s approach

▪ Led to calls to “bring the state back in”

► China is a Main Case in Skocpol’s Book

▪ Collapse of Imperial System due to the state relying on local leaders for military support

▪ Her argument has relevance today, as China relies more and more on regional and local officials

► New Institutionalism

▪ Focuses on theories that use political institutions to explain political outcomes

▪ Three main variants:

► Sociological N.I.

► Historical N.I.

► Rational Choice N.I.

► Rational Choice New Institutionalism

▪ Sees political institutions as the product of rational choices by political actors

▪ Existing rules constrain decision makers, but they may also try to change these arrangements

4. The Constitution: A Regime’s Rules for Making Rules

-This section defines ‘constitution” as the rules of the game for a particular political system. This section then introduces the term ‘rule of law,’ which refers to, among other things, the belief that a government has to follow laws even as it is making new ones. ‘Constitutionalism’ “refers to the idea that constitutions are designed to limit the power of government, that government officials must follow the laws of the land, and that upholding these limitations and following these laws is a key source of legitimacy.”

-A Deepening Your Understanding feature noted here and found on the companion website compares constitutional preambles.

• TIC Sections

o The UK: Not in a single written document; a collection of acts, legal opinions, and customs

o Germany: The constitution lays out both social welfare protections and limits on government

o France: 5th Republic Constitution, established in 1958, combined a strong president with the central principles of the French Revolution

o India: Long, detailed, and heavily amended; federal system with strong central government

o Mexico: Originally written in 1917; prohibits the president and legislators from running for reelection; provides for checks and balances that became important when PRI lost its dominance

o Brazil: Current constitution written in 1988; enshrined privileges for the outgoing military gov’t.

o Nigeria: Most recent constitution written in 1999; emphasis on the need for unity in a country with prevalent identity and political divisions since independence

o Russia: New constitution since December 1993; Putin elected to a third term gave illegitimacy to the constitution in an increasingly authoritarian system

o China: Evidence that a constitution, even one that is somewhat followed, does not equal democracy

o Iran: Constitution after the Revolution implemented a theocracy, including the position of Supreme Leader; overhauled in 1989 (abolished prime min.)

5. Levels of Government

-This section focuses especially on various functions of central and lower-level governments and the relationship between these levels.

• Unitary versus Federal Arrangements

- “The difference between these two focuses on whether there are territorial units within a state that have specific powers that the central government cannot take away. If there are such units, the system is a federal one…. The federal and lower levels of government may also possess certain shared powers.” The advantages and disadvantages of each arrangement are discussed.

-A Deepening Your Understanding feature noted here and found on the companion website examines the United States as a federal system

• Local Government

-This is found in both unitary and federal states. Local governments provide services, as well as implement and enforce decisions of higher levels. Local governments may lack sovereignty, but, when given decision-making powers, their decisions may enjoy greater perceived legitimacy among citizens.

• “Devolving” Government Powers from Central Governments to Lower Levels

- ‘Devolution” involves the transfer of power from a central government to lower governments, usually at the regional level. Devolution does not involve a transfer of sovereignty because devolved power can be taken back by the higher level.

• TIC Sections

o The UK: Despite significant devolution of powers to regions, remains a unitary state

o Germany: “Cooperative federalism” with significant powers for the Länder

o France: Unitary state divided into 26 regions; national and local governments linked through “prefects”

o India: Federal system (28 federal units), but the central government has strong powers

o Mexico: Federal system with 31 federal units (estados) and one federal district; estados dependent on central government for revenue

o Brazil: Federal system with 26 federal units (estados); more power for lower levels than in Mexico; preserves power of local elites

o Nigeria: Formerly an ethno-federal system; now more of an American-style federal system; provides a certain degree of cross-cutting identities among the otherwise complementary identity divisions

o Russia: Federal system; since Putin came to power, central government has increased its power versus the regions (which now number 83)

o China: Unitary state with 31 regions; some devolution, but still not a federal system

o Iran: Unitary state with 30 regions; powerful provincial leaders; central government has overseen “controlled decentralization”

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download