Intro to Comparative Government , the UN, and Industrial Democracies

Comparative Politics Methodology All comparative methods are scientific; therefore, all scientific method is comparative.

3 Basic Questions of Comparative Politics

What are we comparing? Units of analysisstates and governments How do we systemitize our understanding of comparative politics? Cant study all, so we take small samples and generalize. How can we make the comparisons? --Across cultures/nations (vertical) --Across groups/social movements (horiz.) --Across time (temporal)

3 Shifts in Scope of Analysis

General theory is not helpful; limit research to a few cases and address middle range theory Shift #1: Middle-range theory Shift #2: Methods Deductive Method: General to specific Inductive Method: Specifics to general conclusion. Best method: case study Shift #3: Cross-temporal analysis

Comparative Approaches (David Apter)

Institutionalist: look at institutions. (What makes a strong state? Military, economy, resources, legitimacy, adaptive power of states. Is regime Totalitarian, Authoritarian, Transitional, or Democratic?) Developmentalist: look at society, culture. 2 types: Modernization and Dependency school Must understand socioeconomic forces Ethnic Composition plays a role State aggression/frustration/identity I. Couldnt explain Fascist Italy, Weimar German failure (really due to Versailles, economic collapse) Neo-institutionalist: state and society interact

Methods of Analysis
Clinical MethodControlled settings, operate within confinement (lab climate). Highly objective, very analytical, devoid of personal, emotional interference. Manipulate variables to shape experiment Statistical MethodGather random data, look for correlation, hopefully diagnose causation Case Study1 element. Good that it relates to that element only. Ex: Marxism believes that economy is the most important; not always true Comparative MethodContains old and new methods

Comparative Politics Approaches

Traditionallook at cultures, study to learn similarities. Focus: formal institutions only Behaviorist ApproachFeelings, attitudes, functions as opposed to institutions. Shift to infrastructure. Use mass media, foreign policy, public opinions, ideology to analyze. Focus: crossnational, cross-cultural (Western world). Take a prescriptive approach and analyze data empirically Post-Behaviorism-reaction to precision and quantification

The Comparative Method: Stages

1. Identify a problem/question (Ex: What causes/promotes democracy?) 2. Gather data, collect info thru observation 3. Formulate connection between data, make a hypothesis 4. Make prediction/projection (inference) from generalization (if/then statement) 5. Verify/Falsify (Falsification more useful) 6. Theory

Political Culture Building Civil Society

Defn: A buffer between state and individual Ex: Legal association, doctors association There are moral, legal, and economic concerns in building civil society. Moral: Soviets had tradition of strong state crushing religion, had no morals under communism. Soviet people saw free market as cheating. Legal: Soviets had no experience with contracts, ownership, bankruptcy, judges taught to rule the way the party wanted them to Economic: Soviets used command economy exclusively, no entrepreneurial knowledge

Where Do We Focus Our Study of International Politics?

Three levels of analysis: Individual-level: People make policy State-level: States make policy System-level: International Arena encourages/discourages certain types of behavior
10

Man, the State, and WarKenneth Waltz (1959)

Classified theories of international relations into three categories, or levels of analysis. The first level explained international politics as being driven primarily by actions of individuals, or outcomes of psychological forces. The second level explained international politics as being driven by the domestic regimes of states.

The third level focused on the role of systemic factors, or the effect that international anarchy was exerting on state behavior. "Anarchy" in this context is meant not as a condition of chaos or disorder, but one in which there is no sovereign body that governs nation-states.

Waltzs First Level: Man (Human Behavior)

Wars result from selfishness, from misdirected aggressive impulses, from stupidity. If these are the primary causes, the elimination of war must come through uplifting and enlightening men (p.16). For pessimists, peace is at once a goal and a utopian dream, while optimists take seriously the proposition to reform the individual. Pessimists (Niebuhr, Morgenthau) have countered the theory of politics built on an optimistic definition of man but also expose the important error of exaggerating the causal importance of human nature. Since this nature is very complex, it can justify any hypothesis we may entertain. If men can be made good, then one must discover how to alter human nature. This expectation is often buried under the conviction that individual behavior is determined more by religious and spiritual inspiration rather than material circumstance. If man's evil qualities lead to wars, then one must worry about ways to repress them or compensate for them. Control rather than exhortation is needed, tends to assume a fixed human nature, which shifts the focus away from it, toward social and political institutions that can be changed (p.41). Not every contribution the behavioral scientist can make has been made before and found wanting, but rather, the proffered contributions of many of them have been rendered ineffective by a failure to comprehend the significance of the political framework of international action. Social and psychological realism has produced political utopianism (p.77).

Waltzs Second Level: Internal Structure of States

The internal organization of states is the key to understanding war and peace. Removing the defects of states would establish the basis for peace. Definition of a ``good'' state: (a) Marx - according to the means of production, (b) Kant - according to abstract principles of right, (c) Wilson - according to national self-determination and democracy. The use of internal defects to explain external acts of a state can take many forms: (i) type of government generally bad - deprivations imposed by despots upon their subjects produce tensions that find their expression in foreign adventure; (ii) defects in governments not inherently bad - restrictions placed on the state in order to protect the rights of its citizens interfere with executing foreign policy; and (iii) geographic or economic deprivations - state has not attained its ``natural'' frontiers, or ``deprived'' countries undertake war to urge the satisfied ones to make the necessary compensatory adjustments (p.83). Liberal thought has moved from reliance upon improvement within separate states to acceptance of the need for organization among them. Rigorous application of this logic leads to asking to what extent organized force must be applied in order to secure the desired peaceful world. Arguing for a world government and settling for balance of power as an unhappy alternative reveals the limits of the second image analysis. Even though bad states may lead to war, the obverse that good states mean peace is doubtful. Just like societies they live in make men, the international environment makes states (p.122). War results from states seeking to further their own national interest

Waltzs Third Level: International Anarchy

With many sovereign states, with no system of law enforceable among them, with each state judging its grievances and ambitions according to the dictates of its own reason or desire - conflict, sometimes leading to war, is bound to occur. To achieve a favorable outcome from such a conflict, a state has to rely on its own devices, the relative efficiency of which must be its constant concern (p.159). Machiavelli, Rousseau, Thucydides, Clausewitz. In anarchy, there is no automatic harmony. Because some countries may be willing to use force to achieve their ends, and because there is no authority to prevent them from doing so, even peacefully inclined states must arms themselves. Goodness and evil, agreement and disagreement, may or may not lead to war. War occurs because there is nothing to prevent it: there is no automatic adjustment of interests among states and there is a constant possibility that conflicts will be settled by force (p.188). A balance of power may exist because some countries consciously make it the end of their policies, or it may exist because of the quasi-autonomous reactions of some states to the drive for ascendancy of others. It is not so much imposed by statesmen on events as it is imposed by events on statesmen (p.209).

What Causes War?

Self-defense Collective self-defense Help a helpless 3rd party Dissatisfied with status quo (Hitler and Versailles Treaty) Nationalism/Jingoism Perception of leaders (Galtieri, Hussein) Preemptory strikes more effective, self-defense implications (Bush 43 and Iraq) Religion Conquest (outlawed by UN Charter) Parityboth sides are evenly matched and think it would be possible to beat the other Preponderanceone side really believes it can clean the other sides clock Xenophobiaunites citizens

Prisoners dilemma
Two prisoners are accused of a crime. If one confesses and the other does not, the one who confesses will be released immediately and the other will spend 20 years in prison. If neither confesses, each will be released. If both confess, they will each be jailed 5 years. They cannot communicate with one another. Given that neither prisoner knows whether the other has confessed, it is in the self-interest of each to confess himself. Paradoxically, when each prisoner pursues his self-interest, both end up worse off than they would have been had they acted otherwise Demonstrates how many conflicts are caused by system-level factors, although all 3 levels of analysis offer insight into why war happens

What Promotes Peace?

Communication Prisoners Dilemma Interdependenceif you really need something from the other state, you cant risk war Alliancescollective security mechanisms make aggressors less likely to attack Liberal Democracy with transparency

25-27 First World Industrial Countries

USA, UK, France, Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Norway, New Zealand, Australia, Belgium, Austria, Denmark, Canada, Finland, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Ireland, Greece Iffy: Israel

Evolution of the 1st World

1648: Treaty of Westphalia lays ground for the modern state with the principles of territorial integrity and government All faced questions about the role of religion in politics Industrial Revolution impacts countries, leads to social unrest/problems/basis for sociology

Industrial Democracies: Similarities and Differences

Similarities: Wealth: $15K-30K GNP/person). Charles Hauss IDs wealth as reason for democracy Evolution similar Stability-- Dall (Yale): Polyarchy means different groups share power on different issues Post-industrial (Service economy) Post-materialist Differences:

Political systems Economic systems range from USA market capitalism protected capitalism in JPN socialism in SWE Culture (GER, ITY, FRA, JPN have penchant for strong father state. Huntington claims culture makes democracybut if this is true, why are these countries different? Foreign Policy orientations (sanctions on Iraq)

(Ronald Inglehart, U-M) In the industrial world, there are 2 kinds of people: Post-Materialist

Post-Materialism:

Materialist:

Wealthy, well educated Poor UC/MC Uneducated Concerned with Older, environment, feminism, concerned with consumer protection, civil living from day liberties, support peace to day movements. They think about selfactualization

Western Europe
What is Western Europe? Cultural distinction Religion Languages: Slavic, Romantic, Germanic Pre-iron curtain Post-iron curtain NATO EU creates in/out division Neutrals? Austria, Switzerland, Sweden Borders: Turkey? EU requires democracy and human rights Legal systems based on Common Law, Roman Law, Napoleonic Code

Political Ideology: Quick Review

Defn: A coherent and consistent set of beliefs about who ought to rule, what principles rulers should obey, and what policies rulers ought to pursue People regularly have inconsistent opinions (ex: wanting to spend more on both national defense and welfare)

European Ideology
Classical Liberalism Classical Conservatism Pro-Status quo Economic Inequality Opposed excesses of French Revolution and its emphasis on personal freedom, wants to restore power of the State, Church, and aristocracy Doesnt favor EUR integration Thatcherite Conservatism different, more like American Conservatism Against State Intervention in Economy Favors personal and economic liberty. Would have supported free market and opposed government regulation of trade

The Concept of Regime

Institutions and practices that typically endure from government to government Iraqi regime removed 2003

Women in National Parliaments

Benjamin Barber: Jihad v. McWorld

Fragmentation and Globalization compete Tribal enclaves lure members McDonalds and MNCs now have global operations These two forces collide to produce catastrophe and anomie

Fareed Zakaria: Illiberal Democracy

Most democracies before third wave of democratizations were liberal democracies Protect civil liberties Allow for free elections Recent development: only 1 of 2 present Hong Kong: civil liberties but no voting Haiti: voting but no civil liberties

The United Nations

History of the UN
Formed after the fall of the League of Nations which could not successfully rule as a governing body and WW II Has the ability to maintain and deploy its member nations' armed forces as peace keepers. The term "United Nations" was suggested by Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, to refer to the Allies. From August to October 1944, representatives of France, the Republic of China, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union met to elaborate the plans at the Dumbarton Oaks Estate in Washington, DC. Those and later talks produced the framework of the UN (finalized in San Francisco) Originally 51 member countries in 1945 Now over 200 members

UN Financing
Financed by two methods: Assessed and Voluntary

Assessed is decided by how large and wealthy the member country is, therefore determining the amount of money it is able to allocate to the UN (decided when the UN makes its budget every two years).
There is a ceiling rate for countries so the UN is not dependent one country for its money. The ceiling rate is now 22%. Only the United States meets this amount.

UN General Assembly
Meets in regular yearly sessions under a president elected from among the representatives. Only UN organ in which all members are represented, Serves as a forum for members to discuss issues of international law and make decisions on the functioning of the organization. Begins on the third Tuesday in September and ends in mid-December President elected at the beginning of each session Hold special session under request of Security Council if majority of members or majority of a single member Uniting for Peace Resolution has not been effective

Voting in the General Assembly

Voting -important questions recommendations on peace and security; election of members to organs; admission, suspension, and expulsion of members; budgetary matters is by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting. Other questions are decided by majority vote. Each member country has one vote

Security Council
Security Council has the power to make decisions which member governments must carry out under the United Nations Charter. decisions of the Council are known as UN Security Council Resolutions. Presidency of the Security Council is rotated and lasts for one month. Members must always be present at UN headquarters in New York so that the Security Council can meet at any timeweakness in League of Nations president sets the agenda, presides at meetings and oversees any crisis - alternates in alphabetical order Permanent Members (5) Republic of China, French Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America Elected Members.(10) elected to 2 year terms

The Secretariat
One of the main organs of the UN

Headed by the Secretary General, and other civil servants, and provides information for UN Assembly meetings. It also carries out tasks as directed by the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, the UN Economic and Social Council, and other U.N. bodies.

The United Nations Charter provides that the staff be chosen by application of the "highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity," with due regard for the importance of recruiting on a wide geographical basis
The Secretary Generals duties include: -helping resolve international disputes, -administering peacekeeping operations, -organizing international conferences, -gathering information on the implementation of Security Council decisions, and -consulting with member governments regarding various initiatives. The Secretary General may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter that, in his or her opinion, may threaten international peace and security.

Offices under the Secretariat

United Nations Office of the Secretary-General United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services United Nations Office of Legal Affairs United Nations Department of Political Affairs United Nations Department for Disarmament Affairs United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs United Nations Department of General Assembly and Conference Management United Nations Department of Public Information United Nations Department of Management United Nations Office of the Iraq Program United Nations Office of the United Nations Security Coordinator United Nations Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime United Nations Office at Geneva United Nations Office at Vienna United Nations Office at Nairobi

UN Secretaries General
Trygve Lie, Norway (1945-1953)

Dag Hammarskjld, Sweden (1953-1961)

U Thant, Burma (1961-1971) Kurt Waldheim, Austria (1972-1981) Javier Prez de Cullar, Peru (1982-1991) Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Egypt (1992-1996) Kofi Annan, Ghana (1997-2006) Ban Ki-moon, South Korea (2006-present)

The International Court of Justice

Composition: Rosalyn Higgins, President (United Kingdom); Awn Shawkat AlKhasawneh, Vice-President (Jordan); Judges: Raymond Ranjeva (Madagascar), Shi Jiuvong (China), Abdul G. Koroma (Sierra Leone), Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren (Venezuela), Thomas Buergenthal (US), Hisashi Owada (Japan), Bruno Simma (Germany), Peter Tomka (Slovakia), Ronny Abraham (France), Kenneth Keith (New Zealand), Bernardo Sepulyeda Amor (Mexico), Mohamed Bennouna (Morocco), Leonid Skotnikov (Russian Federation); Registrar: Mr. Philippe Couvreur (Belgium). There are always 15 judges on the court elected by members of the UN and the Security Council. Elected for 9 year-terms. Elections held every three years for one-third of the assembly. Only one person per nationality and if the State is not presented by a justice in a case involving that State, the State can elect an ad hoc justice. Nominees have to meet the requirements of their countrys requirements for their highest court of law, or can be jurists of recognized competence in international law. Both countries must submit to ICJ jurisdiction (Case of Certain Norwegian Loans)

Charles Krauthammer: The Unipolar Moment (1990) (2002) (2006)

Thinking about post-Cold War US foreign policy has been led astray by three conventionally-accepted but mistaken assumptions about the character of the post-Cold War environment. (1) that the world is now multipolar, whereas it is in fact unipolar, with the USA the sole superpower, at least for present policy purposes (2) that the US domestic consensus favors internationalism rather than isolationismKrauthammer admits he was wrong here (3) that in consequence of the Soviet collapse, the threat of war has substantially diminished. Dangers may be smaller, but more widespread. Krauthammer thought this unipolarity would last 30 years or so. Revisited in 2002 and 2006 Apogee Halfway through the 30 years, still no alliances against U.S. Some trouble being made by Iran, assisted by Russia/China Economic concerns, debt, EU emerging, China But no clear end in sight. Fewer state-on-state conflicts. Why?

Democratic Theory
Democratization: Spread of democracy Standards of democracy:
Process versus outcome: (Fareed Zakaria)
Procedural (Illiberal) versus substantive (liberal) democracy

Exclusiveness versus inclusiveness:

Role of gender

Individualism versus communitarianism:

Individualism: Rights and liberties of individual are supreme Communitarianism: Welfare of the collective is most important

Three Waves of Democratization (Huntington) But lets examine the causes of democracy before we 40 get to Huntington

Causes of Democracy

Wealth. A higher GDP per capita correlates with democracy and the wealthiest democracies have never been

observed to fall into authoritarianism. There is also the general observation that democracy was very rare before the industrial revolution. Empirical research thus lead many to believe that economic development either increases chances for a transition to democracy (modernization theory), or helps newly established democracies consolidate. Some campaigners for democracy even believe that as economic development progresses, democratization will become inevitable. However, the debate about whether democracy is a consequence of wealth, a cause of it, or both processes are unrelated, is far from conclusion. Education. Wealth also correlates with education, though their effects on democratic consolidation seem to be independent. Better educated people tend to share more liberal and pro-democratic values. On the other hand, a poorly educated and illiterate population may elect populist politicians who soon abandon democracy and become dictators even if there have been free elections. Fewer Natural Resources. The resource curse theory suggests that states whose sole source of wealth derives from abundant natural resources, such as oil, often fail to democratize because the well-being of the elite depends more on the direct control of the resource than on the popular support. On the other hand, elites who invested in the physical capital rather than in land or oil, fear that their investment can be easily damaged in case of a revolution. Consequently, they would rather make concessions and democratize than risk a violent clash with the opposition. Capitalism. Some claim that democracy and capitalism are intrinsically linked. This belief generally centers on the idea that democracy and capitalism are simply two different aspects of freedom. A widespread capitalist market culture may encourage norms such as individualism, negotiations, compromise, respect for the law, and equality before the law. These are seen as supportive for democratization. By contrast, many Marxists would claim that capitalism is inherently undemocratic, and that true democracy can only be achieved if the economy is controlled by the people as a whole rather than by private individuals.

Causes of Democracy Contd

Social equality. Acemoglu and Robinson argued that the relationship between social equality

and democratic transition should be nonlinear: People have less incentive to revolt in an egalitarian society (Singapore), so the likelihood of democratization is lower. In a highly unequal society (South Africa under Apartheid), the redistribution of wealth and power in a democracy would be so harmful to elites that these would do everything to prevent democratization. Democratization is more likely to emerge somewhere in the middle, in the countries, whose elites offer concessions because (1) they consider the threat of a revolution credible and (2) the cost of the concessions is not too high. This expectation is in line with the empirical research showing that democracy is more stable in egalitarian societies. Middle class. According to some models, the existence of a substantial body of citizens who are of intermediate wealth can exert a stabilizing influence, allowing democracy to flourish. This is usually explained by saying that while the upper classes may want political power to preserve their position, and the lower classes may want it to lift themselves up, the middle class balances these extreme positions. Civil society. A healthy civil society (NGOs, unions, academia, human rights organizations, LINKAGE INSTITUTIONSMEDIA, POLITICAL PARTIES, ELECTIONS, INTEREST GROUPS) are considered by some theorists to be important for democratization, as they give people a unity and a common purpose, and a social network through which to organize and challenge the power of the state hierarchy. Involvement in civic associations also prepares citizens for their future political participation in a democratic regime. Finally, horizontally organized social networks build trust among people and trust is essential for functioning of democratic institutions.

Causes of Democracy contd

Civic culture. In The Civic Culture and The Civic Culture Revisited, Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba

conducted a comprehensive study of civic cultures. The main findings is that a certain civic culture is necessary for the survival of democracy. This study truly challenged the common thought that cultures can preserve their uniqueness and practices and still remain democratic. Culture. It is claimed by some that certain cultures are simply more conductive to democratic values than others. This view is likely to be ethnocentric. Typically, it is Western culture which is cited as "best suited" to democracy, with other cultures portrayed as containing values which make democracy difficult or undesirable. This argument is sometimes used by undemocratic regimes to justify their failure to implement democratic reforms. Today, however, there are many non-Western democracies. Examples include India, Japan, Indonesia, Namibia, Botswana, Taiwan, and South Korea. Human Empowerment and Emancipative Values. In Modernization, Cultural Change and Democracy, Ronald Inlgehart and Christian Welzel explain democratization as the result of a broader process of human development which empowers ordinary people in a three-step sequence. First, modernization gives more resources into the hands of people, which empowers capability-wise, enabling people to practice freedom. This tends to give rise to emancipative values that emphasize freedom of expression and equality of opportunities. These values empower people motivation-wise in making them willing to practice freedom. Democratization occurs as the third stage of empowerment: it empowers people legally in entitling them to practice freedom. In this context, the rise of emancipative values has been shown to be the strongest factor of all in both giving rise to new democracies and sustaining old democracies. Specifically, it has been shown that the effects of modernization and other structural factors on democratization are mediated by these factors tendencies to promote or hinder the rise of emancipative values. Further evidence suggests that emancipative values motivate people to engage in elite-challenging collective actions that aim at democratic achievements, either to sustain and improve democracy when it is granted or to establish it when it is denied.

Causes of Democracy contd

Homogeneous population. Some believe that a country which is deeply divided, whether by ethnic group,

religion, or language, have difficulty establishing a working democracy. The basis of this theory is that the different components of the country will be more interested in advancing their own position than in sharing power with each other. India is one prominent example of a nation being democratic despite its great heterogeneity. Previous experience with democracy. According to some theorists, the presence or absence of democracy in a country's past can have a significant effect on its later dealings with democracy. Some argue, for example, that it is very difficult (or even impossible) for democracy to be implemented immediately in a country that has no prior experience with it. Instead, they say, democracy must evolve gradually. Others, however, say that past experiences with democracy can actually be bad for democratization a country, such as Pakistan, in which democracy has previously failed may be less willing or able to go down the same path again. Foreign intervention. Some believe that foreign involvement in a democratization is a crucial factor in its success or failure. For some, foreign involvement is advantageous for democracythese people believe that democracy should be actively promoted and fostered by those countries which have already established it, and that democracy may not otherwise take hold. Others, however, take the opposite stance, and say that democratization must come "from the bottom up", and that attempts to impose democracy from the outside are often doomed to failure. The most extreme form is military intervention to create democracy, with advocates pointing to the creation of stable democracies in Japan and Germany (disputed) [12] after WWII, while critics point out, for example, the failures of colonialism and decolonization to create stable democracies in most developing nations, where dictators often quickly took power after a brief democratic period following independence. Age distribution. Countries which have a higher degree of elderly people seems to be able to maintain democracy, when it has evolved once, according to a thesis brought forward by Richard P. Concotta. When the young population (defined as people aged 29 and under) is less than 40%, a democracy is more secure.

Samuel Huntington, The Third Wave (1991)

3 Waves of Democratization:
The first one brought democracy to Western Europe and Northern America in the 19th century. It was followed by a rise of dictatorships between 1918-1939. The second wave began after World War II, but lost steam between 1962 and the mid-1970s. The latest wave began in 1974 and is still ongoing. Democratization of Latin America and post-Communist countries of Eastern Europe is part of this third wave. Recall Zakarias article on Illiberal Democraciesmostly 3rd wave Two-turnover test determines if consolidation is complete

Causes of The Third Wave

Loss of legitimacy of authoritarian regimes due to increased popular expectation of periodic and competitive election, and/or poor economic performance or military failure. Growth in global economic output helped modernize many less developed economies. Economic modernization, which includes structural changes like increased rates of urbanization, education, and a rising middle class, unleashes a constellation of social forces with the organizational capacity and education to press for democratic governance. Changes in the Catholic Church brought about by Vatican II emphasized individual rights and opposition to authoritarian rule. This shift in world view was especially important for the Catholic countries of the Mediterranean and Latin America, as well as the Philippines, Poland and Hungary. Regional Contingency Factor (Snowball effect. For Soviet equivalent see Domino Theory), also known as demonstration effects, happens when success of democracy in one country causes other countries to democratize. External factors, most notably the efforts to spread democracy by the European Union and the United States.

Democratization as a Policy Goal

Increased democratization in recent times Linked with economic development and education levelmore investment in education, consumer products Classic question: Does economic liberalization precede or follow political liberalization Attitudes: Freedom is not always the first priority of citizens Inevitability? Francis Fukuyama

47

Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (1992)
The end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government. Fukuyama's thesis consists of 2 main elements: The empirical argument: Since the beginning of the 19th Century, there has been a move for States to adopt some form of liberal democracy as its government. The philosophical argument: Fukuyama examines the influence of thymos (or human spiritedness). His argument is democracy hinders risky behavior. Enlightened rational thought shows that the roles of master and slave are unsatisfying and selfdefeating and hence not adopted by lofty spirts. This type of argument was originally taken up by Hegel and John Locke.

Problems With Spreading Democracy

Many countries are not ready May hinder a countrys economy Different standards of democracy (if illiberal democracy is adopted, may never get liberal) Limited public support in many areas due to perception of government corruption, lack of education (Democracy requires educated citizenry)

Democracy, Foreign Policy, & Security

The new global standard of acceptable governance? Implications for world politics: Foreign policy success Democracies more successful at war (but is this a tautology?) Women and political participation

Democratic Peace Theory-- Democracies Are Unlikely to Fight Each Other

50

Criticisms of Democratic Peace Theory

Peace is an anomalywar the normal condition Democracies are not always peaceful What about the United States and its war record? Feminists would argue need for positive peace
51

Francis Fukuyama The End of History and the Last Man (1992)
"What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government. But not so fast.

Clash of Civilizations Samuel Huntington (1991)

After the Cold War, what are we going to fight about? Democracies generally have same western values, rarely fight each other People's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world.

Samuel Huntington, Clash of Civilizations (1992)

World politics is entering a new phase, in which the great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Civilizations-the highest cultural groupings of people-are differentiated from each other by religion, history, language and tradition. These divisions are deep and increasing in importance. The fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future. In this emerging era of cultural conflict the United States must forge alliances with similar cultures and spread its values wherever possible. With alien civilizations the West must be accommodating if possible, but confrontational if necessary. In the final analysis, however, all civilizations will have to learn to tolerate each other.

Huntingtons Civilizations

Analysis of Huntington
Rejected by most scholars in the 1990s After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Huntington has been increasingly regarded as having been prescient in light of: The United States invasion of Afghanistan. The 2002 Bali Bombings. The 2003 Invasion of Iraq. The 2004 Madrid train bombings. The 2006 cartoon crisis. The 2005 London bombings. The ongoing Iranian nuclear crisis. The 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. The 2008-09 Israel-Gaza conflict.

The Breakup of Yugoslavia: The Aftermath

Benjamin Barber: Jihad v. McWorld (1992)

Fragmentation and Globalization compete McDonalds and MNCs now have global operationsproduce and sell products around the world. World smaller than everinterconnected by internet, telecommunications Tribal enclaves lure members These two forces collide to produce catastrophe and anomie

Fareed Zakaria: Illiberal Democracy (1997)

Most democracies before 1960 were liberal democraciestwo characteristics Protect civil liberties Allow for free elections Recent development: only 1 of 2 present Examples: Haiti Singapore Hong Kong

Paul Kennedy The Rise and Fall of Great Powers (1988)

Kennedy: Great powers eventually fall, usually after imperial overstretch Examples: Rome, British Empire Such Declinists worry U.S. is guilty of overstretch too and will pay a price as a resultloss of Pax Americana
Critics: Lax Americana more dangerous than Pax Americana. America MUST be involved to keep the world secure. Social Overstretch more of a danger: The idea that spending money on altruistic social welfare programs to support the least productive people in society financially drains that economy.

Learning Objectives
Define democracy Explain variations in democracies in different countries Define rule of law Describe characteristics of civil society and civic culture Outline support for and exceptions to the hypothesis that capitalism and affluence are prerequisites of democratic political cultures Outline the development of democratic states in Western Europe since the 18th century Define political legitimacy and explain its role in democratic civil societies Explain the roles of social capital and tolerance in democratic civil societies Outline the characteristics of the types of political parties found in Western democratic states Describe characteristics of presidential and parliamentary regimes Explain the primary roles of bureaucracies in democratic regimes Define and apply the concept of an integrated elite Describe an interventionist state and its primary characteristics Define feedback within the context of political systems

Learning Objectives
After mastering the concepts presented in this chapter, you will be able to: Describe and define state, nation, regime, and government. Understand the definition of a nation-state. Gain introductory knowledge of the process of comparative political analysis. Comprehend the difference between globalization and imperialism. Recognize the essence of political system and system theory and be able to apply this theory in comparative analysis. Describe the input-output process of political system operation. Identify roles and positions of states and nation-states in international politics. Explain the applicability of the international political economy. Understand the three-way classification of states and regimes. Define the fundamentals of the public policy and the process of its analysis.

Learning Objectives
describe comparative politics as a field of political science. explain at least one rationale for comparing political systems. explain why generalizations and theories are goals of comparative politics. describe how comparativists use scientific method. define state in the context of comparative politics. explain why the state is a focus of comparative politics in this textbook. distinguish between the types of states described in this chapter and offer examples of the types. recognize and offer initial definitions of other core concepts identified in the chapter. describe a generic political system and label its most important elements. identify historical, contemporary, domestic, and global factors that determine basic patterns of politics and government.

Learning Objectives
After mastering the concepts presented in this chapter, you will be able to: Gain knowledge of democracy as a political system. Become aware of the latest electoral results and their impact on political realities in the USA, Great Britain, France and Germany. Understand concepts and criteria of democracy, such as rights, elections, the rule of law, civil society and capitalism in the free market. Define liberal and liberalism. Describe and define the origins of the democratic state empowered by the evolution of political thoughts on democracy. Differentiate between philosophical positions of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Recognize the process of democracy building Understand the challenges of democratization. Define and explain legitimacy and the process of political legitimization. Comprehend the role of political parties in political system. Identify different political ideologies and recognize the difference between left and right political ideologies and parties.

Learning Objectives
Classify leading political parties in France, Germany and Great Britain. Understand political positions of Liberals, Radicals, Social Democrats and Christian Democrats. Define catch-all political parties. Understand postindustrialism and post materialism and their affect on the development of the political system. Recognize mechanisms of party dealignment and realignment. Describe interests groups and understand factors contributing to the political protest. Recognize differences between presidential and parliamentarian forms of government and their impact of government formation, duration, stability and effectiveness. Define cabinet responsibility and vote of confidence in parliamentarian systems. Recognize the role of bureaucracy. Define the law of iron triangle. Describe the process of public policy formation and implementation. Define the interventionist state. Understand challenges of economically liberalized democratic state. Describe the impact of foreign policy on international relations. Recognize balances that democratic states should achieve to be more effective and efficient.

Learning Objectives
After mastering the concepts presented in this chapter, you will be able to: Discuss the summary of the book, including the summary of the current economic and political situation in the world. Understand the definitions and components of crisis, danger, and globalization. Comprehend the basics of global warming challenges in the contemporary world. Define the concept of interdependence in the process of globalization. Recognize the key elements of the historical formation and impact of imperialism. Understand the concept of challenges in the way of thinking. Discuss differences between zero-sum and positive-sum outcomes. Gain complete understanding of the whole book and recognize the importance of studying politics and international affairs, especially in comparative prospective.