intro to politics

lukes 4 faces of power

face 1: direct decision making power (e.g, observable power in parliament)

face 2: non-decision making power (keeping issues off the agenda)

face 3: shaping beliefs and preferences (framing and priming)

face 4: controlling the agenda (what people even think of as a legitimate issue)

path dependence

early choices create a self-reinforcing trajectory, making it increasingly difficult to change path. (e.g: lippset and Rokkan’s frozen party theory)

public goods…

public good= non-excludable, and non-rivalrous (e.g: street lighting)

private good= excludable, rival (e.g: sandwhich)

club good: excludable, non-rivalrous (e.g: netflix)

common pool resources: non-excludable, rivalrous (e.g: fishing ground)

collective action problem

group would benefit from collaborating, but individual incentives push desire to free ride, so the collective beneficial outcome doesnt occur till external mechanism forces coordination.

seperation of powers

montesquiaeu (1748)

james madison said…

“ambition must counter act ambition”

right in law does not equate to right in practice

de jure does not equal de facto

franchise history (rights)

1902 Aus women right to vote and run, but % in parliament remained low for decades to come.

fptp vs pr

fptp leads to stability but lacks responsiveness, pr leads to responsiveness but lacks in stability

end of licensing, no more prior restraint

1695

post publication liability era begins (sedition/defamation)

copyright act (1709)

4th estate

media as informal fourth branch (watchdog)

Media effects

agenda setting= controls WHAT you think about

framing = controls HOW you interpret it

priming= repitition deepens association.

hypodermic needle

lasswell, 1920, myth assumes passive audience w universal reaction

australias press freedom (stat)

39/180 (2024), down from 27/180 (2023)

Bartolloni + mair 1990

1. distinct social structure basis

2. shared values

3. political organization/mobilisation

lipset + rokkan 1967

national revolution → (centre and periphery division) + (state and church division)

industrial revolution → (urban and rural division) + (worker and employer division)

freezing thesis

Lipset and Rokkan 1967 (ab 1920’s)

silent revolution

inglehart 1977

counter revolution

ignazi 1992

GAL TAN

cultural dimension, marks et al 2006

populism framework

mudde/muller

1. anti-establishment

2. anti- pluralism

3. authoritarian tendencies

thin idealolgy → attaches to host ( trump + chavez)

catch all parties

kirchheimer

1922 party definition

weber → “power seeking organizations”

1957 party definition

Downs → “rational coalitions for governmnet control” → median voter theorem

1976 party definition

sartori → “ a group that presents candidiates and places them in office”

fptp → 2 party system

duvergers law

2025 us political identification results (stat)

independents 41%, democrats 28%, republicans 28%

v-dem regime types 2025

liberal democracy 31, electoral democracy 56, electoral autocracy 57, closed autocracy 35

world population under autocracy (stat)

74%, only 600m live under liberal democracy

linz argument against presidentialism

1. dual legitimacy

2. rigidity

3. winner-takes all

4. dual role

5. plebiscatatrian temptation

3 types of accountability, luhrmann et all

horizontal, vertical, diagonal

backsliding targets: horizontal, diagonal then vertical

making present what is not literally present

pitkin 1967

descriptive vs substantive

descriptive does not automatically equate to substantive but often does it improve it

mansbridge’s 4 mechanism of representation

promisorry

anticipatory

surrogate

gyroscopic

australian women in parliament (stat)

2004= 26% → 2025= 49.6%

real federalism dimensions

fiscal decentralization, administrative decentralization and political decentralization

directions of mlg

(supranational) upwards

(regions +provinces) downwards

(ngo’s + civill society) horizontal

Hollowing out

nation state squeezed from all 3 mlg directions

targeted and conditional vs universal and rule based

clientalism vs programmatic

steps to executive aggrandizement

1. pack institutions w loyalists

2. horizontal accountability

3. diagonal accountbaility

4. vertica accountability

challenges to democracy

1. affective polarisation

2. disinformation

3. declining trust

4. national vs subnational governance

can backsliding be reversed

if insititutional brakes remain intact, there is societal moblization and you catch it early

—- of 3rd wave autocraticization has been stopped

70%

— of aus pop think misinformation a big problem

55%

aus house of reps only — women

38%

countries w elected local gov (stat)

50 years ago= 50%, present 87%