Nature and scope of comparative poltics PDF

Preview

Summary

notes...

Description

Unit 1st MEANING NATURE AND SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS INTRODUCTION The subject of comparative politics virtually constitutes a study in the direction of the ‘expanding horizon of political science’ wherein we seem to have emerged from the ‘plains of doubts and darkness’ to a ‘higher plateau’ to see what our passionate endeavors, particularly of the skeptical decade of the 1950s and the ‘determined decade’ of the 1960s, “have produced, in which the earlier high points of the discipline have lost some of their erstwhile importance or at least are now seen in a new light, and those whose significance suffered by neglect, have emerged in our perspective and awareness in the vale of political knowledge, which contains both rushing torrents (i.e., political process as a whole) as well as limped pools (i.e., speculative political thought)”. What has played the role of a motivating force in this important direction is the quest to study ‘political reality’ through new techniques and approaches in a way so that the entire area of ‘politics’ may be covered. As a result, not only study of the ‘government’ but the ‘governments’ has become the central concern that implies the taking of ‘decision’ whether “in the United Nations, or a parish council, in a trade union or a papal conclave, in a board room or a tribe.” Comparative politics has appeared as a subject of momentous significance on account of this vital reason that a great deal of experimentation “is now going on with new approaches, new definitions, and new research tools. Perhaps the main reason for the present intellectual ferment is a widespread feeling of disappointment and dissatisfaction with the traditional descriptive approach to the subject.” MEANING AND DEFINITIONS The term ’comparative politics’ is of recent origin and came into vogue in the fifties of the present century and is indicative of the expanding horizon of political science. The political scientists made a bid to study political reality through new techniques and approaches. The old concepts were also seen in a new light. One of the main reasons which encouraged the development of a new approach for the study of politics was dissatisfaction with the traditional descriptive approach to the subject. The scholars laid greater emphasis on the informal political process rather than political institutions and state. They borrowed several ideas and concepts from other social sciences and provided political studies with a new empirical orientation. Before we proceed further to distinguish between comparative government and comparative politics, it shall be desirable to define comparative politics; 1. According to goldsmith: “comparative politics is the study of the forms of the political organizations, their properties, correlations, variations and modes of change” 2. According to E A Freeman: “comparative politics is the comparative analysis of the various forms of the government and diverse political institutions” 3. Michael Curtis: ‘comparative politics is concerned with the significant regularities, similarities, and differences in the working of political institutions and political behaviors. 4. John blonde: comparative politics is the study of patterns of the national government in the contemporary world’.

DISTINCTION BETWEEN COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS Although two terms ‘Comparative Politics’ and ‘Comparative government’ are used loosely and interchangeably. There is a point of distinction between the two. Which are as follows? 1. A comparative government consists of institutions responsible for making collective decisions for society. More narrowly, according to some thinkers, government refers to the top political level within such institutions. Whereas, comparative politics defines as a process whose opinions or interests are initially divergent, reach collective decisions that are generally accepted as binding on the group, and enforced as common policy. For Miller, the political process typically involves elements of persuasion and bargaining together with a mechanism for reaching a final decision. 2. The comparative government covers a comparative study of different political systems with special emphasis on their institutions and functions. While as comparative politics emphasizes all that comes within the purview of the State as well as non-State activities 3. The comparative government covers only in rulemaking, execution, and adjudication while comparative politics not only deal with political activities but also takes help from Anthropology, sociology, and Psychology. 4. Comparative government is concerned with significant activities of political institutions only while as comparative politics is concerned with significant regularities, similarities, and differences in the working of political institutions and political behavior. 5. Edward freeman attempts to bring out a distinction between the two in these words “By Comparative government means that the study of political institutions and forms of government, while comparative politics deals with micro as well as macro aspects of the political system”. NATURE OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS Comparative Politics seeks to analyze and compare the political systems operating in various societies. In doing so, it takes into account all the three connotations of political activity, the political process, and political power. The political activity consists of all the activities involved in conflict resolution or the struggle for power. Since the basic means of conflict-resolution is the authoritative allocation of values, it involves an analysis of the process by which the authoritative values are made and implemented in all societies. In this sense, politics stands for the political process. It involves the study of all formal as well as no formal structures through which the political process gets operationalised. The political process receives information and signals from the environment and then transforms this information and signals into authoritative values. Finally, politics, being a struggle for power or a process of conflict resolution through the use of legitimate power, involves a study of power or power relations in society. Laswell describes politics as the process of shaping and sharing of power, Robert Dahl holds that politics involves power rule and authority to a significant extent. Hence the study of politics naturally involves the study of power. As such comparative politics involves the study and comparison of political activity, political process and struggle for power in various political systems. It seeks to analyze and compare political systems in a holistic way as well as through a comparative analysis of their structures, functions, infrastructures and processes.

Comparative Politics nowadays characterized by several features. Some important features are: Analytical and Empirical investigation The analytical and empirical method adopted by the writers belonging to the latest phase has enlarged the field of our inquiry as it ‘has cleared up the mist in which many helpful distinctions within the framework of political studies lay obscured’. Eckstein has referred to the late decades of the 19 th century as a period in which political science, influenced by ‘primitive positivism’ affected a divorce between its normative and its descriptive concerns. By and large, they retained the analytical categories developed by their predecessors but began to shape their meanings to fit descriptive rather than normative purposes. Study of infra-structure The study of comparative politics is not confined to the formal structure of the government as was the trend with the traditional political scientists. Here a student is concerned with inquiry into matters of public concerns, with the behavior and acts that may concern a society as totality or which may ultimately be resolved by the exercise of legitimate coercion. Study of both developed and developing countries What has added more to the significance of the study of comparative politics is the emphasis of more writers on the ‘politics of the developing areas’. It has occurred as a realization that the subject of comparative politics must include all the government along with their infrastructure that exist in the contemporary world and where possible references to government throughout time. It is, thus no longer confined to the study of the selected European and American governments. Focus on the inter-disciplinary approach What has enriched the field of comparative politics and at the same time, made it a complex subject’ is the focus on the interdisciplinary study? Writers have made more and more use of tools that they had borrowed from the disciplines of sociology, psychology, economics, anthropology, and even from natural science like biology. For instance, system analysis owes its origin to the discipline of biology that has been borrowed by leading American political scientists like David Easton from sociologists like Robert Merton and Talcott Person. Value-free theory Finally, the subject of political science has lost its normative aspect and assumed empirical dimensions in the sphere of comparative politics. The result is that value-free political theory has replaced value-laden political theory. The concern of the students is not with the things as they ought to be in their ideal form; it is with what they are. There is hardly any place for the rules of history or ethics in the field of comparative politics as the entire field has been covered by the rules of other disciplines. Quest of theory building The subject of comparative politics is necessarily concerned with the study of the political system both macro and micro aspects of government. But it is not limited to this; comparative politics also build up new theories.

Use of scientific method Another feature of the comparative politics is that it is base on scientific method. It may use of new concepts and techniques develop by the sociological anthropology. It proceeds based on quantification and develop theories. Emphasis on data collection Comparative politics is a realistic, empirical, relevant, and comprehensive study of political systems. Its approach is scientific and to proceed scientifically upon data collection. It is an important and essential feature of comparative politics because without data it cannot proceeds its study comparatively realistically, logically, and scientifically. Avoid formalism Contrary to the traditional approach, the modern comparative approach denies formalism; formalism means a legal and historical description of the government institution alone. Modern comparative approach on the other hand emphasizes the study of the political behavior of the individuals, groups, culture, values, etc. Development of new concepts The development of the new concept is another characteristic of comparative politics. It has discarded the study of old concepts such as state legislature, executive, judiciary, etc. The new concepts include political systems, political roles, political culture, political socialization, modernization, political development, etc. it still a continuing process and more. Horizontal and vertical comparison Comparative politics conduct studies at the multidimensional level. It not only studies the political systems and institutions of various states but also political systems established within a state. The former is called the horizontal comparative study the later is called vertical comparative study. SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS Traditionally, the scope of Comparative Politics was limited and parochial. It was confined to the study of constitutions and political institutions and political institutions in respect of their features, powers and positions. It was ‘parochial’ in the sense that it is involved a study of only European constitutions. Amongst the European Constitutions, the British constitution was regarded as the mother constitution and standard constitution for measuring the worth of all other constitutions. The emphasis was upon the study of governments and institutions. In contemporary times, comparative politics has come out of the parochialism and limited scope of comparative government. It has come to acquire a wide scope which includes the analysis and comparison of the political processes, political activities, political functions, and political structures of all political systems, developed as well as developing and European as well as Asian, African and Latin American. After Second World War, it has undergone revolutionary changes in respect of its scope and methodology.

Modern political scientists realized the shortcomings of traditional studies and decided to eliminate formalistic, legal institutionalism and extreme normativism of the traditionalists. They accepted that it must include all the process of politics and not only legal institutions. The actual functioning of all formal as well as informal political structures like interest groups, pressure groups, political parties and political elites should also form the part of the scope of comparative politics. They came forward to develop new tools, concepts, models and theories of political processes for analyzing and comparing the behavior of all the political systems. They borrowed several new concepts from other social sciences, and even some from natural sciences, for analyzing, explaining, and comparing all political phenomena. Consequently, there appeared a revolutionary change in the scope and nature of comparative politics studies. Today, comparative politics has secured a very wide scope. It includes all that comes within the purview of politics--the study of all political processes, political activities, political relations and power relations found in every part of the world. A comparative study of the regularities, similarities, and differences among the structures and functions of all political systems forms the core of its scope. The following are the main subject matter included in the scope of comparative politics All political structures The scope of comparative politics includes all structures, formal and informal, governmental, and extragovernmental. These structures are directly or indirectly involved in the struggle for power. It is not confined to the study of three forms of governmental organs—legislature, executive, and the judiciary. Along with these, bureaucracy, interest groups, pressure groups, elites, political parties, and all other political groups of human being forms a part of the scope of comparative politics. Functional studies Comparative politics seeks to study more from the functions which constitute the political process and their actual operations in the environment. It studies the functions of interest articulation, interest aggregation, political communication, rulemaking, rule application, rule adjudication, socialization, decision making, policymaking, and the like. Study of political behavior Another important part of the scope of comparative politics is study of the process of politics. Voting behaviour, political participation, leadership, recruitment, elite behaviour, mass politics etc. form an integral part of comparative politics Study of similarities and differences Comparative politics also undertake similarities and dissimilarities between various political processes and functions. However, the approach is not descriptive and formalistic. It is on the basis of actual functioning of political structures and processes, the similarities and dissimilarities are explained and compared. The objective is not to decide which is the best process or system. The objective is systematic explanation, understanding and theory building. Study of political systems

Comparative politics seeks to analyze the actual behavior and performance of political systems-western as well as non- western. The political systems are analyzed and compared in terms of the structures, functions, capabilities and performances Study of environment The study of comparative politics demands a study of the psychological, sociological, economic and anthropological environment. For this study, the political scientists have developed concepts like political culture, political socialization, political modernization etc. The study of the political culture of various political systems forms a very popular focus in comparative politics. This concept has definitely enhanced the ability of political science to explain and compare the functioning of various political systems. Thus, the scope of comparative politics has become very broad. It includes facts within the purview of political processes and activities. It seeks to study all mechanisms of politics. Study of power, influence and authority Comparative politics is a study of ‘power’, influence and authority. These three concepts differentiate one political system from the other system. Comparative study of political systems Comparative study of different political systems and their analysis determines the scope of comparative politics. Different political system can be compared in respect of their performance, stability, change and processes. It was David Easton who gave a model of political system on the basis of which different political system can be compared with one another. Easton tries to explain as to how a political system manages to survive. He pleads that a political system has its own boundaries. It has the criterion of using legal force. It is surrounded by environment. The political system and its environment send certain inputs into the system itself. Inputs include demands for the allocation of goods and services. Demands cannot, however, be met in the absence of supports. Support is given in the form of obedience to law and payment of taxes. However, sometimes demands may be put in access and support withdrawn. This leads to stress and strain on the political system. The political system gives output in the shape of policy decision, which forms feedback. In this way we can compare various political systems with respect to the volume of demands, inputs, conversion out puts and feedback. We can also find out how system experience stress and strain and how do they overcome them. Classification of political systems Closely related to Easton’s system approach, Almond has given structural and functional approach for the classification of the political systems. Almond believes that political systems can be classified as traditional, transitional and modern on the basis of the degree of the inputs functions perform by them in term of political socialization and recruitment, interest, articulation, interest aggregation and communication; and output function of the rule making, rule application and rule adjudication. Comparison can be made by keeping in view the fact as to which structure performs which functions. On the basis of fusion or differentiation of the structures, classification of the political system can be made. In his revised version of structural functionalism, he added capability also as a criterion for comparing the performances of political systems.

Role of modernization Almost all the political systems have set before themselves the goal of modernization. Modernization involves progress in attitudes, values, and aspirations of the people. From the political angle, modernization involves wider participation, nation-building, state-building, and differentiation of structures, functions, and rules and also the rationalization of the authority. Based on these criteria, we can compare the political process in different countries of the world. Huntington is of the opinion that the process of modernization in the under developed countries is leading to instability and breakdown. The people have grown high hopes of better participation, better standard of living, etc. but institutions do not grow to that extent. This leads to crisis of legitimacy, identity, participation and nation-building. Study of developing societies In contrast to the parochial approach made by the traditional comparative politics, modern comparative politics makes a universal approach. The study of comparative politics no longer concerned with a study of selected European or American government alone. It is as much a study of the devel...