Poli-227 Notes for 09/24

Homework for 10/1

Journal: Make sure you review the syllabus. Summary of news. Make sure you cite
your min (4) sources. Accurate URLs for sources.
Reading: Reading chapters 3-6, and chapters on France.

3. Cross-national opinion survey research.

A. Compare the political attitudes of people across different countries

B. Asking the same questions in two or more countries
C. Helpful to understand what other countries truly think.

Summary: Ask the same set of questions about our financial problems, but ask it of
different countries. “What should we do here?”

Compare attitudes, why do we do things we do?

4. Rational Choice Theory

A. Assumption is made that decision makers are rational actors.

B. Therefore, decision makers are thought to make rational decisions based on
evidence.
C. Theory tries to predict how decision makers will act when faced with a policy
matter and have reviewed the evidence.

Summary: If we can build better theories and understandings, if certain courses of

events happen, and we can predict to some degree what decision people will make,
that would be good.

The belief that human beings and people in position of power are rational
beings
Capable of taking input, capable of making the best decisions for themselves.
(Operating in their best interest)

Truth is, humans are rational beings sometimes. Some leaders are crazy/evil, but
rational.

5. Case Study Method

A. Used widely in comparative politics and is often found incorporated into the
previous mentioned theoretical perspectives.
B. Researchers usually look at specific political, economic, social features within one
or more countries.
C. Compare results for a more accurate understanding of what is occurring in the
countries being studied.
Summary: Political scientists have realized that it is impossible to build one unified
theory about how leaders and countries will operate. “The best thing we can do is
get involved in case studies”.

Traditionally looking at one country, a “unit of analysis”. Within that one country we
may look at a number of different kinds of issues. Economics, politics, etc.

In other words, look at countries involved in similar set of circumstances

to one you’re studying.

Empirical evidence, stay away from normative, anecdotal. Facts push us in the right
direction, not vice versa.

Widely criticized. But *most widely used*.

Types of Studies in Comparative Politics:

1. Studies of one country ( a cornerstone of the case study approach)

2. Studies of two or more countries (a second cornerstone of the case study
approach although more difficult to carry out)
3. Regional or area studies
4. Studies across different regions
5. Global comparisons.

6. Thematic Studies

This may include themes such as: the changing role of the state; class relations;
political socialization; dependency theory; transitioning to democracy.

These studies are some of the most difficult to carry out and are usually very
theoretical in nature.

Summary: Not just economics, but get in to social issues. What happens when you
have poor people that are continually kept poor? Do they eventually revolt?

Ex: How does a change in government, from a Saddam-era Iraq to a new

democratic Iraq work? What can we expect? Is there anything that can go
wrong with it? Etc.

Arend Lijphart’s Case Study Categorizations

Atheoretical Case Study: Single country analysis. Entirely descriptive. Ideal type.
Non-theory building.

Summary: Is whats going on working for the people?

Interpretive Case Study: Like the “atheoretical case study” but uses established
theoretical propositions. Thinks of this type of case study as applied science. We are
using what we already know and applying it to the case study.

Summary: Ex: Iraq new democracy, “this is what I know about the Iraqi
constitution. Okay, does this really allow for a separation of power? Between a law
making body, an executive, and a court system?”

Basically looking to apply what we learn to a theory. Separation of powers, etc.

Hypothesis-generation base studies: used to develop one or more hypotheses

about comparative politics.

Hypothesis is then tested using a larger number of cases (more than one country).

Testing of hypotheses are the building blocks of general theory.

Summary: When a traffic light is green, cars go through the intersection. 

hypotheses

Sit at an intersection and take a look.  test

Ex: If we look at Iraq, did what we did there work?

Theory-confirming cases: an analysis of a single case study

Use of established generalizations (Existing theoretical propositions) (Ex:

democracies can vote, etc)

Examination of one single variable. (Ex: right to vote)

Evidence presented strengthens the “truth” of established generalizations. (Ex:

further strengthens what we know about democracy)

“Hey look, we brought democracy to Iraq, theres no reason to think we

can’t do this with other middle-eastern societies.”

Theory-infirming cases: the same idea and techniques as theory-confirming

cases (disproving)

However, the evidence presented weakens the “truth” of an existing theoretical

proposition (an established generalization).

Ex: Iraq doesn’t demonstrate many of the theoretical assumptions of what a

democracy is. Iraq really isn’t a democracy at all.
 Industrialized Democracies

Four Basic Tenets of Them:

1. Basic rights, rules and law – especially individual freedoms such as

speech, press, fair trial, etc. (The rule of law is very important too)
(codification of these laws (writing down))
2. Competitive elections – that are free, fair, and open to the public. However
electoral systems vary widely between countries.
3. Civil society – The ideal of government and people being closely intertwined
in a legitimate sense.
- People accept the rules of society but also feel they have a stake in the
outcome.
- Civil society makes it hard for revolutionary protests to take root.
4. Capitalism and affluence – industrialized democracies actively embrace
capitalism
- However, not all IDs are equally wealthy, nor are all of the populations in
these countries equally well off.
- Various types of capitalism/market forces are at work in IDs.

Political Parties and Ideology

- IDs usually have two or more political parties that compete in elections.
- Ideology varies from the far left (communism) to the far right (fascism).
- Liberalism – means something different in the USA vs. Europe
- USA – liberalism is associated with the left – government working for the
people. (In Europe liberalism means you’re on your own) (In USA government
has a place in your life under liberalism)

-USA left = good government takes care of society

-USA right = not governments job to take care of society/insure everyone
prospers

-Euro lib = conserve

-Euro conserve = lib

Other Commonalities of IDs

1. Interest group influence – Madison’s theory that people will form groups to
get what they want in the political arena.
- This is also known as pluralism.
- Influence of these groups varies widely from country to country.
- But competing with pluralism is elitism.
 Summary: Not only does society have the right to cast votes and determine
the results of elections but they also have the right to form associations
(groups) to protest, advance economic agendas, political agendas, etc.
Elitism – the belief that democratic countries are not government by the
masses (pluralism) but by a select, limited segment of society (the elites).
Elites – control the government, attend the most prestigious colleges, own
the most wealth, etc.
Summary: We’re deeply suspicious of the elites. On the flipside though,
elites may not be a bad thing. Wouldn’t you rather a better educated person
hold the power? Reality is, elites run the show.

Both American and European democracies have a battle going between these
above two.

2. Political protest – IDs have a long and established tradition of political

protest; also known as “feedback”
- Extremely important to the development of civil society in a country and the
belief that all citizens have a stake in the outcome.
- Built on the premises of inclusion and co-option – but how many people
engage in feedback?

3. Representative democracies (limited democracy, small number of people

elected entrusted to do the people’s business) with lawmaking houses
controlled by elected representatives.
- But considerable differences in lawmaking styles
- USA – presidential system
- Most of Europe – parliamentary system
- France – presidential/parliamentary system (combines the two)

The largest reproduced form of democracy is the parliamentary system

(British model).

4. Foreign policy – the industrialized world shares many similarities when it

comes to democratic government. Economics, human rights, etc.

Many differences too:

These differences include: geo politics, issue-areas, economic

development, military policy, etc.
- Cuba policy is a cogent example. (Europeans trade with Cuba, and vacation
there. We don’t, can’t, they’re evil.)
 Lecture 10/08

Great Britain Continued

12. If one party does not control a majority of seats in the parliament then two or
more parties must form a coalition.

13. The combined seats of the coalition will give them a majority of seats in the
parliament

14. When a PM has to rule by coalition the parliament has much more influence
over the lawmaking process.

In countries with a lot of political parties, the government often collapses.

What needs to be done is band together a few smaller parties in to one larger
coalition in order to choose a PM. But then, the PM who is chosen has to be a lot
more careful about making demands in terms of what he or she should like to see
done. Because he or she doesn’t have to worry now about just offending his or her
own party. He has to worry about influencing smaller parties. And making sure
he/she doesn’t offend those smaller parties.

If the coalition falls apart or dissolves, you go back to a situation where no one party
has a majority in parliament, so a vote of confidence comes up for the PM.

Coalitions and what party has more seats is meaningless in our way of governing.
However, in the British model is it imperative.

UK has a Bicameral Legislature, that is, a House of Commons and a House of Lords.

House of Commons: Their Congress, powerful. Elected by the people. This house
selects PM.

House of Lords: Upper house. Not directly elected by the people, so very little
power. (This is the norm)

• Made up of 682 members (this number fluctuates) they are unpaid.

• The House of Lords is appointed by the political parties. Powerless because of
this.
• Members get appointed to the House of Lords through the political parties.
I.e. When labor is running the government, they get a large number of
appointments to the house. Seats are also reserved for members of the
Anglican church.
• Appointments known as “Life Peers” or “Hereditary Peers”
• Purpose #1: Gives the wealthy a continuous voice in the government.
• Purpose #2: Can’t make meaningful changes to laws, but can stall (3-6
months) to give time to let the people know a bit about whats going on
 • Plays a unique judicial role (court) because some of Britain’s highest judges
also hold seats in the House of Lords.
• Contains the Supreme Court of Appeal, which is the UK’s highest court. Hears
appeals on both criminal and civil cases.
• Unpaid.

Supreme Court of Appeal

• Not for constitutional law, they have no system for that.

• The court is made up of 12 judges who are salaried – paid by the people
through taxes.
• The judges are also members of the House of Lords.
• Perk of being a Judge is appointment to House of Lords.

Hereditary peers: Seats in the House of Lords that have stayed in one “family”
for generations
Tony Blair made some steps to halve these seats.

Life peers: Seats in the House of Lords appointed by the major political parties.
The appointees are distinguished Britains and hold the position for life. Two
examples: Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Elton John.

Main Political Parties in the UK

1. Labor Party: Held power since 1997 to the president (Like the Democrats in
US)
2. Conservative party (Tories): Held power through most of the 1980s and 1990s
(Like Republicans)
3. Liberal Democrats: Who have never held power but who do have control of
anywhere between 10-15 percent of the seats in the parliament, depending
on the outcome of an election. Offshot fringe party that gained traction in the
1970s. Left of labor. A LOT more government intervention.

Recent Famous Prime Ministers

1. Winston Churchill
2. Margaret Thatcher
3. Tony Blair – Bill Clinton of British politics
4. Gordon Brown – Current

Summary: House of Commons is a rubber stamp for laws PM writes and sends
off.

France

Some Facts:
• By European standards, France is a large country (2.5 times the size of the
UK)
• One of Europe’s most affluent countries … higher standard of living.
• Very broad social net including national health care, university tuition of
about $200 a year, day-care as part of public schools.
• Fascinating contrast to our private health care systems.
• Citizens pay more in taxes, but they get more in benefits.
• Very homoegenous society
• Predominately Catholic, but not militant. Changing over time.
• One of few countries that has an official language authority (language
agency) to protect the language.
• Women are not equal with men as they are in the US
• Racism is a problem…National Front Party
• France overthrew its tradition of monarchy in 1789 with the French revolution
• But France then had a succession of failed democracies, a few monarchies,
and even a failed neofascist regime
• 1958 gave birth to the Fifth Republic – France’s 5th attempt at democracy.
• The George Washington of modern day French politics is Charles Degaulle
• Degaulle was a military hero during the French resistance against the Nazi
occupation of France during WWII
• Degaulle was basically recruited by the people to oversee the creation of the
fifth republic
• Degaulle, unlike Washington, said if he was going to play a role in politics he
was going to get some things. I’m going to put my hands all over the creation
of this 5th republic.
• Established a French constitution that combined a parliamentary system of
government with a strong executive branch (a presidency)
• This has led to France being called a presidential-parliamentary system of
government.
• Similar to PM setup of Britain, (cabinet, PM, etc).
• Added to that, by Degaulle, he demanded that in the writing of the political
documents, France was going to have a strong national figurehead.
• More independent president. Prime Minister of France is chosen by National
Assembly (Lower house). But President is directly elected.
• PM serves a quasi-term of 3-4 years.
• President serves a fixed term of 5 years.
• The French government is a blend of a strong president with a bicameral
parliamentary system.
• The two houses of the French parliament are the National Assembly (the
lower house) and the French Senate (the upper house).
• The National Assembly is the more powerful of the two houses. (lower house)
 • Things between them and UK differ when it comes to terms of Executive level
of gov.
• France has 2 executives, PM and President. President has more power
however.
• The National Assembly is directly elected by the people (577 seats) – MPs
serve 5-year terms.
• The Senate is “elected” (appointed) by “electoral colleges” in regions of
France (316 seats). Senators serve 9-year terms.
• Electoral Colleges are made up of locally elected officials.
• The parliamentary side of the French government is much like the UK
• Prime minister chosen by the National Assembly
• Selection of cabinet ministers to assist the prime minister in writing laws (the
government)
• A more powerful lower house of parliament than the upper house

Fifth Republic: Take parliamentary style of government and presidential form and
put them together.

Interesting part is the give and take between PM and President

The Presidency

1. If you want to be the president of a country, you don’t want it to be America,

if you want power.
2. The powers of the French President are numerous
3. French President has much more power than the USA President
4. Among Those Powers:
a. Rule by decree for 6 months (marshall law, no legislature, just
executive, bow down!)
b. Call national referendums (pres disagrees with parlia., takes vote
directly to people)
c. Dissolve the parliament
d. Call for new elections

Important Differences between French system and British system

1. The cabinet does not need to be approved by the parliament. PM has latitude
to appoint ministers to run the agencies (if the President says okay)
2. Government cannot be defeated in a no confidence vote unless the
opposition wins an absolute majority of all MPs.
3. An MP must give up seat in the parliament if chosen for the cabinet
4. The lower house cannot change the tax and spend provisions in the
government’s budget. This differs from French system. (THE PRESIDENT HAS
A LOT TO SAY ABOUT THE BUDGET)
 5. The power of the parliament grows during times of cohabitation – when one
party controls the PM’s seat and another party controls the presidency.
President must be more open to negotiating and bargaining.
• Nicolas Sarkozy is the current president of France
• Francois Fillon is the current PM
• The French President serves a 5-year term in office
• Directly elected by the French people
• Prime Minister is chosen by the National Assembly

British: Lose no confidence based on plurality (whoever gets the most votes wins)
of votes
French: Has to be an ABSOLUTE majority (more than 50%+ of the votes))

Exam Notes for Next Week

• Mix of questions from both textbook and notes.

• Pay short attention to the textbook at your own peril. STUDY. READ. FOOL.
• Study guide can’t get any more user friendly. Use page numbers fool.
• Current events. Keep up.
• Study Guide covers the chapters. Don’t worry about Germany.
• Current Events will be on big stories, internationally in the news. Read paper.

Germany

Current Chancellor of Germany: Angela Merkel

Rechtsstaat: State of laws