Foreign Gov. & Politics - Midterm Review

You can do this! 💫

Individual Level Analysis

How you decide on who you vote for (ex. based on policies, appearances, etc.)

State Level Analysis

How states/nations interact with each other

International Level Analysis

How international issues influence the way countries interact with each other (ex. how trade policies influence countries’ interactions)

Rational Choice Lens

Decisions based on what we believe will serve our best interest - overlooks the subjectivity of rationality, our perception of what our best interest is can be influenced by availability of information

Institutional/Structural Lens

Decisions made because they’re what we have to make, not necessarily what we want to make (ex. obligations, financial constraints, etc. influencing a decision) - structures are built by individuals but impacted by cultures

Cultural Choice Lens

Decisions are made because of cultural influence - can lend itself to essentialist/hateful arguments (ex. “Of course THOSE people would want that”)

Conservatism

There is a “right” way to live your life, and the further you are from that “objective good”, the worse you are - creates a natural hierarchy

“Nobless oblige”

The responsibility of the noble/powerful to take care of the common/weak

Liberalism

There is no one right way to live your life (no “objective good”, only subjective), means you can’t rationalize a natural hierarchy - but people have different views on which rights to prioritize and how to protect them

Socialism

Aims to alleviate the inequities produced by the government/economy/etc., often utilizes redistributive programs (ex. universal healthcare, pensions, etc.) to “level” things out - socialism is NOT Marxism!!

Marxism/Communism

Marx argues that capitalism “becomes so efficient that it kills itself” - it becomes super productive, but economic incentives drives wages down; creating a system where there is a limitless amount of goods and no one to buy them

Facism

A “reactionary political ideology”: doesn’t want to maintain what exists (conservatism) but seeks to “go back to when things were really good” - hierarchy order at the expense of personal liberty

Executive institutions

Executes/enforces policy - in some countries, the executive is both head of state and head of government; in others (often parliamentary systems), the executive is the head of government only

Legislative institutions

Debates and creates law - often divided into chambers (unicameral/bicameral most common); in most bicameral parliamentary systems, control of the lower house dictates control over government

Judicial institutions

Most “supreme” judiciaries deal with questions of constitutionality, “regular” crimes are usually handled by lower courts

Bureaucratic institutions

Handles most of the day to day operations of government

Military institutions

It’s kind of obvious what this one is

Nation

A group of people sharing an identity, norms, values, etc.

Political culture

The political norms, values, behaviors, motivations, etc. of a nation - can be very broad or specific and can change over time

Where does Anderson say the nation comes from?

“Imagined communities” that are constructed both consciously and unconsciously

• Imagined because most members of the nation will never meet each other, yet can picture each other

• Imagined as limited because any nation has boundaries

• Imagined as sovereign - nations dream of being free, the emblem of this freedom is the sovereign state

• Imagined as a community because of the perceived comradeship

Where does Chatterjee say the nation comes from?

Nations are formed around real collective experiences

State (according to Weber)

“An entity with a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force”

Traditional State Legitimacy

“The ruler says it, so this is what we do” - historical claim

Charismatic State Legitimacy

“Something about you makes us want to follow you” - choice-based

Rational-legal State Legitimacy

“This is the law, so this is what we do”

Where does Tilly say the state comes from?

“War makes the state and the state makes war”

• As states fight progressively larger wars, they need greater income to sustain them

• Tax collection needs to be expanded, but so do services to keep people happy - expanding the state

• Eventually, no more income can be extracted - more people and/or land are needed, which triggers another war

Coercion-intensive states

Primarily uses force, produces authoritarian regimes

Capital-intensive states

Primarily uses “market-based” solutions, produces democracies

Where does Whitfogel say the state comes from?

The “Hydraulic Empire” - large, complex projects serve as the catalyst rather than war

Policy making process

Identify problem, propose solution, execute, evaluate, repeat if necessary - each step can run into problems

• Problems with identification: not all information may be available, we might not recognize the same thing as a problem, the problem may also be buried inside of another problem

• Problems with proposing solutions: may not have all the correct information (again), may not be able to execute the best solution due to limitations of will/resources/expertise/etc.

• Problems with executing: practical problems that come with introducing a new project (solution)

• Problems with evaluation: (again x3) limits on information, differences of viewpoint

• Sometimes the best answer is no answer - it can be so costly to solve a problem that it’s better to just live with it, solving a problem may also create new problems

Typology

A set of defined types used to try and classify outcomes

Aristotle’s typology

Authoritarianism

Governments where power is centralized in the hands of one or a few people

Monarchies/theocracies

Kings, queens, popes, sultans, etc. - their authority is derived from tradition and conservative social structures that produce a relatively rigid social hierarchy

Military dictatorships

Can be expected to be common if we accept Weber’s definition of the state as a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force

“Modern” dictator

Exploits media technologies to appeal directly to the masses

Totalitarianism

A form of government in which the line between the public and private has been erased - the political is now the personal and private; your private life is public and political

Key features of totalitarian propaganda

• Appeals to emotion rather than reason

• Doublespeak/other illogical arguments

• The creation of an “us” and a “them”

The Panopticon

Totalitarian states are very difficult to create and maintain, but you can drastically reduce the number of guards, cameras, and prisons you need if you get citizens to police each other… Society has become a prison, and all you need to do is judge and execute

Competitive authoritarianism (according to Levitsky and Way)

The regime’s position isn’t absolute, the dictator has to try to remain in power

Domains to measure competitive authoritarianism

• Electoral - are elections competitive? Is there a feasible way for the leader to lose power?

• Legislative - is the legislature independent or a rubber-stamp institution? (Rubber-stamp institution = the body approves everything automatically/without meaningful debate)

• Judiciary - is the judiciary independent or a rubber-stamp institution?

• Media - is there an independent media? Censorship or intimidation? Is there state-sponsored media and to what extent is that media a mouthpiece for the state?

Federal Democracy

The different levels of government have set/defined roles, powers, and authority

Unitary Democracy

Authority is delegated down from the national government (ex. the national government says the local government can do something, which means by extension that the national government can take that away)

Elites

Those with power disproportionate to their numbers

Political parties

Do a lot of the “grunt” work of democracy - fundraising, canvassing, mobilization, candidate vetting and recruitment, organizing, etc.

Special interest groups

A catch-all term for groups that represent specific interests (ex. unions)

Social and political movements

Broad terms that refer to a group/groups of people galvanized around a particular cause (ex. civil rights, suffrage) - when the “social” movement becomes overtly political/ideological, it becomes more of a “political” movement

Presidential system

Voters elect the legislature and executive branches

Parliamentary system

Voters elect the legislature, the legislature chooses the executive

“Snap” elections

A prime minister calls an early election to reinforce their mandate before making potentially unpopular moves

Majoritarianism/first-past-the-post system

“Most votes win” system - produces clear mandates but reduces representation, no “second” place. Incentivizes fewer parties but doesn’t guarantee it

Ranked Choice Voting

Awards “second” choice votes

Proportional system

The number of seats is equal to the number of votes - improves representation, but at the expense of clarity of mandate (who’s in charge)

Minority government

Some countries permit forming a government with only a plurality of the legislature (less than 50%, but more than anyone else) - can be very delicate because forming a government typically describes having enough seats to pass pieces of legislation, and in minority governments, you don’t necessarily have that

Coalitions

In some cases, if the election is close, a smaller party can wield power disproportionate to their numbers - ex. if both the Liberal and Conservative parties have won 48 seats (96 total with 100 up for grabs), then the centrist party with only 4 seats decides who forms a government by agreeing to join a coalition

“Kingmaker” party

The party that decides who forms a government by agreeing to join a coalition

Grand Coalitions

When the two largest parties combine into a coalition, even if they are ideologically opposed

Umbrella Coalitions

Very unstable coalitions comprised of lots of different, ideologically opposed parties - sometimes for the sole purpose of locking out a dominant party

Democratic backslide

The process of the erosion of democracy across a number of possible metrics - has accelerated in the last fifteen or twenty years

• Some kinds of erosion in democratic institutions: electoral abnormalities, overreach of one branch of government over others, etc.

• Backsliding can disproportionally affect certain groups either intentionally or by design (ex. PiS in Poland - governing party exploited existing political cleavages for their own gain by targeting LGBTQIA+ individuals and groups)

What does Huntington argue is the cause of democratic backslide?

Simply, democracy comes and goes in waves

What does Putnam argue is the cause of democratic backslide?

We have a steep decline in social capital which renders us unable to meet the challenges of contestation and exacerbates polarization

What is the cultural argument for the cause of democratic backslide?

We are becoming increasingly authoritarian in our political culture - we expect absolute wins and any loss is an absolute loss

Anderson

Says the nation comes from “imagined communities”

Chatterjee

Says the nation is formed around real collective experiences

Weber

Says the state is “an entity with a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force”

Tilly

Says that the state comes from war - “war makes the state and the state makes war”

Whitfogel

Says the state comes from the “hydraulic empire” - large, complex projects can serve as the catalyst rather than war

Levitsky and Way

Defines competitive authoritarianism as meaning the regime’s position isn’t absolute - the dictator has to try to remain in power

Huntington

Says the reason we have a democratic backslide is simply because democracy comes and goes in waves

Putnam

Says the reason we have a democratic backslide is because of a steep decline in social capital that exacerbates polarization