can be made only with certain reservations and awareness of its limi- tations.

27 As social objects lack the

fixed and definite character of natural objects, particularization in social and political forms is just not
possible. We cannot construct models that copy faithfully the particularities of the real world. Our
mathematical and computer tools are inadequate in representing the complex inter-relationship
between social and political structures. The highly complex models 'run the risk of being artifacts'
because the more complex a model, the more sensitive it is to slight variations. Highly particularized
models lack both generality and relevance to any specific problem of social science. On the other hand, a
completely general theory may lack explanatory power. It might enunciate the most elementary truisms
about social and political structures, or alternatively, mislead by attempting to do something which it
cannot accomplish. Hence, it is better to make use of the comparative method and theory, or confine
oneself to say- ing different things about distinguishable systems rather than the same thing about every
system.

The ideas of structural-functional analysis are spelt out by Gabriel Almond in his famous introduction to
The Politics of the Developing Areas. It would, however, be worthwhile to trace functionalism to earlier
contributors. The concept of functionalism refers to the social system as an organic body in which certain
vital functions must be performed by different organs and structures in order that the social system may
maintain itself and survive. A social system, for instance, must perform recruitment and socialization
functions so that a society is able to have its members in constant supply and that these members are
socialized into common norms and values to maintain social cohesion. From this basic 'organismic'
notion of a social system, there followed a number of ideas: (a) that the functions are necessary for the
survival of a social system, and that therefore, (b) the functions are universal. The earlier version of
functionalism, as associated with Radcliffe-Brown and Malinowski in particular, emphasized three main
principles: functional unity, functional universalism and func tional indispensability." According to
Radcliffe-Brown, the function of a social activity or institution is the contribution it makes to the total
social life. Malinowski further maintained that every social institution or tradition fulfils some vital
function, and every custom eful

or belief therefore, is indispensable. Robert Merton has subjected this version of functionalism to scath-
ing criticism and provided necessary correctives." He first points outApproaches in Political Analysis 29

that the same social institution or item may have multiple functions, and that the same function can be
diversely fulfilled by alternative items. The concept of a functional alternative, equivalent or substi- tate
therefore, removes the commitment to, or the value of, parti- cular social items as universal categories
serving the entire society. Merton also introduces the concept of dysfunctions, and points out that some
structures or institutions may indeed produce consequences harmful to the society. As he points out,
functions are 'those observed consequences which make for the adaptation or adjustment of a given
system', and dysfunctions, "those observed consequences which lessen the adaptation or adjustment'.
He further adds that there is also the possibility of non-functional consequences, which are simply
irrelevant to the system.
* Another important contribution to structural-functionalism comes from Talcott Parsons." His theory of
action is determined by a struc- tural relationship between culture, personality and the social system.
There are five pattern-variables in each set of contrasting modes. They are: (a) affectivity or affective
neutrality, that is, emotional gratification or detachment; (b) self-orientation or collective orienta- tion;
(c) universalism or particularism; (d) achievement or ascrip- tion; and (e) specificity or diffuseness. These
pattern-variables are alternative and contrasting modes of behaviour or organization. However, all social
systems are based on the fulfilment of four basic functions: adaptability, goal achievement, integration
and pattern maintenance. These functions, it was initially believed, are charac- teristic of a 'social
system', and it was deemed desirable to search for "appropriate functional categories for the analysis of
'political sys- tems' which though part of the social system, at times attempt to engulf the whole, or at
least to affect it substantially.

-Almond introduced a structural-functional approach to political science, and though his scheme
followed Easton and Lasswell, he was the first to apply this approach to the analysis of politics. In
Almond's formulation, the modern political system is distinguished from the traditional one on two
major dimensions: (a) structural differentiation-structural non-differentiation and (b) secular-theo- cratic.
In addition, there are several secondary dimensions which point out certain aspects of style. By
structural differentiation, Almond means that there are structures in the political system that have a
functional distinctiveness, and which tend to perform a regulatory role in relation to that function within
the political system as a

EE30 POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY

whole." "In order to operationalize the concept of structural differen- tiation, he identifies the functions
that all political systems are sup- posed to have in common. Almond classifies these functions into four
input functions, namely, (a) political socialization and recruitment. (b) interest articulation, (c) interest
aggregation, and (d) political communication; and three output functions, namely, (a) rule-making. (b)
rule-application, and (c) rule-adjudication. They are called conver- sion functions because inputs are
converted into outputs by the pol- itical process. A modern system, according to Almond, is a differen-
tiated political system because in each of these functional areas, there exist specialized and distinct
structures which regulate that function. The modern style or mode is distinguished from, or contrast- ed
against, the traditional style of regulating such functions on the dimensions suggested by Parsons.

Almond's conceptual analysis of the modern political system pro- vides a useful framework for the
analysis of some highly significant problems in cross-cultural research. His framework, however, appears
to have certain limitations which prevent it from being completely effective as a basis for developing
more general theories of political modernization. It is difficult to apply his scheme on a broad basis to
include both historical and contemporary cases. The formulation tends in effect to equate the modern
political system with the modern Anglo-American democratic system, and it cannot be applied to the
societies which have adopted a totalitarian form of government or which are as yet underdeveloped.
Holt and Turner point out that its definitions employ too many dimensions, and that it neglects the study
of societal functions." Holt and Turner suggest the following guidelines for use. (a) A useful approach to
the study of political modernization must

be able to accommodate both the democratic, and the autocratic or

totalitarian states. (b) Different types of systems should be defined by a very limited number of
characteristics. (c) Particular attention must be devoted to the societal functions of

government. (d) Instead of psychological explanation (reductive explanations of macro-social

phenomena), efforts should be focused upon socio- logical (emergent) explanation, with an explicit
attempt to achieve maximum closure and autonomy," Holt and Turner in their studies of France (1600-
1789), China(0180), presest another version of structural-functionalism for the analysis of politi cal
factors in economic growth, and also develop hypotheses on the role of these factors in economic
development. In their framework, they are mainly concerned with 'the social system at the societal
level", and have adopted the four basic functional requisites postu lated by Parsons. They are: (a)
adaptation, which is concerned with the relationship of the social system with the non-human part of
environment; (b) goal attainment, which is concerned with the achievement of a system's goals in
relationship to the material, cul- tural, and other aspects of societies; (c) pattern maintenance, which is
concerned with maintaining conformity with the belief-value (cultural system); and (d) integration, which
is concerned with achieving necessary coordination among differentiated but inter- dependent roles. The
overview of systems and structural-functional analysis

attempted above leads us to the following critical observations. (a) There is no universal acceptance of
what exactly constitutes the political functions. Different authors put forward different ver- sions or
inventories of functions. (b) Functionalism is based on the notion of equilibrium, and provides little
understanding of conflict which is the heart of the political process. The organismic implica- tions of
functionalism, even after Merton's correctives, does not fully account for the growth and development
of the political system. (c) Functionalism does not reckon with history, and the historicity of political
phenomena. The implication of universal functional requisites assumes the full development of political
systems, and disregards the developmental problems and perspectives of new nations. (d) An uncritical
application of functionalism is likely to result in the neglect of factors and events unique to a political
society. It is in the context of each country's historical compulsions and political choices that the politics
and political development of a country can be understood." To proceed with functional analysis on a
universal basis is to distort the proper focus and to rob political analysis of its significance.

The inability of systems analysis and structural-functional analysis

to deal with developing countries in particular are ably summed up by D.L. Sheth. According to him, 1.
The systems theory proceeds with the assumption that terri torial entities called nation-states have
acquired the formal32 POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY

characteristics of an ongoing system.

2. The relationship of variables and their conceptualization pre- supposes a uniform pattern in all
countries, which is not warranted by facts.

3. The approach wishes away the inconvenient aspects of political change which are difficult to quantify;
and the will and ability of human individuals to intervene in the causal process of development. In
developing countries faced with the task of nation and state build- ing, conflicts and crises of growth and
development involve factors and situations that cannot be meaningfully explained in terms of a given
version of political functions.

There is however, one aspect of functionalism that holds great promise in political analysis. Political
functions may be understood as the consequences of political actions, and as such, may focus on the
conditions and consequences of political events in a particular country. This would also deal with the
problem of historicity by taking account of an individual or a discrete institution or event. The Marxian
approach, on the other hand, distinguishes itself

not only as a revolutionary doctrine but as the one which seeks to revolutionize political analysis by its
way of thinking about social, economic and political phenomena. Marxian analysis is rooted in dialectical
and historical materialism according to which history progresses through a conflict between two classes
in which society is perpetually divided. 'All past history', according to Marx and Engels, 'with the
exception of its primitive stages, was the history of 36 class struggles'. These warring classes are the
products of the modes of production and of exchange. History is the record of class conflict between
those who own the means of production and others who do not, and this class conflict is the central
theme and motive power in politics.

The modes of production in all times determine production re- lations, resulting in the existence of
classes and a new kind of social relations. These social or economic relations, that is class situations,
determine men's ideas and mental behaviour. 'It is not the conscious- ness of men that determines their
existence but, on the contrary, their social existence determines their consciousness." Social exist- +37
ence or social relations are the determinants of the character of society, politics and religion. With the
passage of time, men develop new and advanced methods of production; so correspondingly new
relations of production and further new ideas, laws, customs, morals 32 POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY

characteristics of an ongoing system.

2. The relationship of variables and their conceptualization pre- supposes a uniform pattern in all
countries, which is not warranted by facts.

3. The approach wishes away the inconvenient aspects of political change which are difficult to quantify;
and the will and ability of human individuals to intervene in the causal process of development. In
developing countries faced with the task of nation and state build- ing, conflicts and crises of growth and
development involve factors and situations that cannot be meaningfully explained in terms of a given
version of political functions.

There is however, one aspect of functionalism that holds great promise in political analysis. Political
functions may be understood as the consequences of political actions, and as such, may focus on the
conditions and consequences of political events in a particular country. This would also deal with the
problem of historicity by taking account of an individual or a discrete institution or event. The Marxian
approach, on the other hand, distinguishes itself

not only as a revolutionary doctrine but as the one which seeks to revolutionize political analysis by its
way of thinking about social, economic and political phenomena. Marxian analysis is rooted in dialectical
and historical materialism according to which history progresses through a conflict between two classes
in which society is perpetually divided. 'All past history', according to Marx and Engels, 'with the
exception of its primitive stages, was the history of 36 class struggles'. These warring classes are the
products of the modes of production and of exchange. History is the record of class conflict between
those who own the means of production and others who do not, and this class conflict is the central
theme and motive power in politics.

The modes of production in all times determine production re- lations, resulting in the existence of
classes and a new kind of social relations. These social or economic relations, that is class situations,
determine men's ideas and mental behaviour. 'It is not the conscious- ness of men that determines their
existence but, on the contrary, their social existence determines their consciousness." Social exist- +37
ence or social relations are the determinants of the character of society, politics and religion. With the
passage of time, men develop new and advanced methods of production; so correspondingly new
relations of production and further new ideas, laws, customs, morals