comp politics final questions

What is Comparative Politics? Why Do We Study Comparatively?

Comparative politics is a subfield of political science that scientifically studies internal political structures, actors, and processes by comparing political systems. We study politics comparatively for three main reasons: to describe similarities and differences between political systems, to explain why these similarities and differences exist, and to make predictions about political outcomes. By comparing cases and using empirical evidence to test hypotheses, comparative politics allows researchers to draw causal conclusions, develop generalizations, and improve theories.

⭐ Memorize this structure:

Definition + Describe + Explain + Predict

How Does the Number of Cases Influence the Method of Comparative Studies?

The number of cases influences the comparative research design and the methods researchers use. A small number of cases, or small-N research, allows researchers to study cases in greater depth and examine complex configurations or combinations of factors. A large number of cases, or large-N research, allows researchers to identify broader patterns and often use quantitative and statistical methods. However, the number of cases does not determine the method by itself; the research question, type of data, and time period also influence the appropriate research design.

⭐ Memorize:

Small-N = depth/configurations

Large-N = breadth/patterns

But: Research question determines the design.

Two Negative Aspects of Theory in Comparative Politics

1. Theory can create blinders/confirmation bias.

Researchers may focus on evidence that supports their theory and overlook disconfirming evidence.

2. Grand theories can be overly broad.

They may attempt to explain everything but therefore fail to generate meaningful or specific predictions.

That's a strong answer.

Internal Validity vs. External Validity

Internal validity refers to the extent to which the conclusions or inferences drawn from the cases actually studied are correct. External validity refers to the extent to which the findings can be generalized to other similar cases that were not included in the study. In general, studying fewer cases in greater depth may strengthen internal validity, while studying a broader and more representative set of cases may improve external validity.

For a fill-in-the-blank, however:

Internal = Correctness of conclusions about cases studied

External = Generalizability to other cases

Independent, Dependent, and Confounding Variables

The independent variable is the explanatory factor or potential cause that is expected to influence an outcome. The dependent variable is the outcome that the researcher seeks to explain. A confounding variable is a third factor that may affect the relationship between the independent and dependent variables, potentially creating a misleading or spurious relationship if it is not controlled for.

According to the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, what are the four qualifications of a state?

According to the Montevideo Convention of 1933, a state must have four qualifications:

1. Permanent Population

A state must have a stable group of people who live there.

2. Defined Territory

A state must have a specific geographic area with defined boundaries.

3. Government

A state must have a government that rules over its population and territory.

Important: The government does not have to be democratic. It could be:

• Democratic

• Authoritarian

• Dictatorial

• Autocratic

• Imperial

4. Capacity to Enter into Relations with Other States

A state must be able to interact independently with other states.

This includes:

• Making treaties

• Having diplomatic relationships

• Participating in international organizations

• Conducting international relations

⭐ Easy way to remember:

🧠 Simple explanation:

A state needs people, land, a government, and the ability to interact with other countries.

Important note:

The Montevideo Convention says that the political existence of a state does not depend on whether other states recognize it.

What are the two most common challenges to the nation-state? What are the state's solutions to these challenges?

Challenge 1: Maintaining Order and Control

The state has to maintain control over its territory and population.

It may face:

• Internal rebellion

• Crime

• Political violence

• Civil conflict

• Groups competing for power

• Foreign threats or invasion

The state's solution: The Monopoly on Legitimate Violence

According to Max Weber, the state claims a monopoly on legitimate physical violence within its territory.

This means:

The state is considered the only organization that has the legitimate right to use force.

For example:

• Police enforce laws.

• The military protects the country.

• The government can use force against people who break the law.

However, Weber also emphasized that force alone isn't enough. A state also needs legitimacy, meaning people accept that the government has the right to rule.

The formula:

Force/Coercion + Legitimacy = Stable Government

---

Challenge 2: Obtaining Resources and Protecting the State

States need resources to:

• Run the government

• Maintain the military

• Provide public services

• Protect their territory

• Fight wars

The state's solution: Extraction and Protection

Charles Tilly explained the development of states through four activities:

1. War-making → Fighting external enemies

2. State-making → Eliminating internal rivals

3. Protection → Protecting the population

4. Extraction → Collecting resources, especially taxes

These activities strengthen one another.

For example:

The state collects taxes → uses resources to build a military → protects the country → becomes stronger → can collect more resources.

Tilly's famous idea is:

"War makes states and states make war."

⭐ Easy answer to memorize:

The two major challenges are maintaining order/control and obtaining resources and providing protection. The state responds by using its monopoly on legitimate violence to maintain order and using extraction, such as taxation, along with protection and state-building to obtain resources and strengthen itself.

What are the four defining features of modern democracies? List the two approaches of measuring democracy.

The Four Features of Modern Democracies

1. Free and Fair Elections

Elections must be:

• Free → Citizens can vote and candidates can campaign without intimidation.

• Fair → Votes are counted honestly and the government does not unfairly disadvantage the opposition.

• Regular → Elections happen repeatedly at established intervals.

2. Universal Participation

Most adults should have the right to:

• Vote

• Run for political office

Participation should not be excluded based on:

• Income

• Education

• Gender

• Ethnicity

• Religion

Some restrictions can exist, such as age or citizenship requirements.

3. Civil Liberties

Citizens have basic rights and freedoms.

These include:

• Freedom of speech

• Freedom of the press

• Freedom to form political parties

• Freedom to form interest groups

• Protection from government abuse

Democracies generally use constitutions, independent courts, and other accountability institutions to protect these rights.

4. Responsible Government

Elected leaders are accountable to the people.

Government leaders must:

• Follow the law

• Respect citizens' rights

• Answer to elected representatives

• Ultimately be accountable to voters

---

Two Approaches to Measuring Democracy

1. Dichotomous (Binary) Approach

This treats democracy as an either/or category.

A country is either:

Democracy ✅

or

Dictatorship ❌

Przeworski and colleagues used this type of approach by looking at conditions such as:

• The chief executive is elected.

• The legislature is elected.

• Multiple parties compete.

• Alternation in power is possible.

Easy way to think about it:

"Is this country democratic or not?"

2. Continuous Approach

This treats democracy as a spectrum.

Countries can be:

Highly authoritarian ←————→ Highly democratic

This approach recognizes that countries can be more or less democratic.

Examples of democracy-measuring projects include:

• Polity

• Freedom House

• V-Dem

Easy way to think about it:

"How democratic is this country?"

⭐ Main difference:

Dichotomous = Is it a democracy?

Continuous = How democratic is it?

Distinguish between the presidential and parliamentary systems. What are the strengths and weaknesses of both systems?

The biggest difference is how the executive leader is chosen and how the executive branch relates to the legislature.

---

🟦 Presidential System

In a presidential system:

Citizens → directly elect President

Citizens → separately elect Legislature

The president serves as both:

• Head of government

• Head of state

The president and legislature have separate sources of electoral legitimacy.

Key features:

• President is popularly elected.

• President and legislature are elected separately.

• There is a clear separation of powers.

• President and legislators usually have fixed terms.

• Congress cannot normally remove the president through a vote of no confidence.

• The president cannot normally dissolve the legislature.

Example:

The United States.

---

✅ Strengths of Presidential Systems

1. Voters have more direct choice

Voters can choose:

• A president from one party

• Legislators from another party

2. Clear responsibility

It is easier for voters to know who is responsible for the executive branch.

If the president performs poorly, voters know who to hold accountable.

3. Legislative independence

Legislators can disagree with the president without automatically causing the government to collapse.

4. Fixed terms provide stability

The president normally stays in office for a set period.

---

❌ Weaknesses of Presidential Systems

1. Political polarization

Presidential elections can become winner-take-all contests, which may increase political conflict and polarization.

2. Executive-legislative gridlock

The president and legislature may belong to different parties and disagree about policies.

This can cause political deadlock, where the government struggles to make decisions.

3. Dual legitimacy

Both the president and legislature can claim to represent the voters because both were independently elected.

This can create conflicts over who has greater political authority.

4. Risk of executive overreach

A powerful president may try to weaken checks and balances or ignore opposition.

---

🟥 Parliamentary System

In a parliamentary system:

Citizens → elect Parliament → Parliament determines Prime Minister

The prime minister is the head of government.

The head of state is usually separate from the head of government.

The head of state may be:

• A monarch, such as in the UK

• A president with limited political power, such as in Germany

Key features:

• Citizens elect the legislature.

• The legislature determines who becomes prime minister.

• Prime minister usually comes from the legislature.

• Executive and legislature are closely connected.

• The government must maintain the support of parliament.

• A vote of no confidence can force the government to resign.

• Elections can sometimes occur earlier than expected.

---

✅ Strengths of Parliamentary Systems

1. Less gridlock

Because the executive usually comes from the legislative majority, the government can often pass policies more easily.

2. Easier to remove ineffective leaders

A government can be removed through a vote of no confidence.

3. Encourages cooperation

Political parties may need to form coalitions to create a government.

4. More flexible

If a government loses support, leadership can change without necessarily waiting for a fixed presidential election.

---

❌ Weaknesses of Parliamentary Systems

1. Coalition instability

If no party has a majority, several parties may have to form a coalition. Disagreements can cause the government to collapse.

2. Less direct choice of executive

Voters usually do not directly elect the prime minister.

3. Party control

Members of parliament may feel pressured to support their party's leadership.

4. Government instability in some cases

Frequent votes of no confidence or coalition disagreements can lead to changes in government.

---

⭐ Quick Comparison

Presidential	Parliamentary
President is directly elected	Prime minister usually comes from parliament
President = head of state + head of government	Head of state and head of government are separate
Clear separation of powers	Executive and legislature are closely connected
Fixed terms	More flexible terms
No vote of no confidence	Vote of no confidence possible
Can experience gridlock	Usually less gridlock
Voters can split their vote	Executive depends on parliamentary support

🧠 Easiest way to remember:

Presidential = Separate

Parliamentary = Connected

How do structural explanations, institutional explanations, political actors, and international forces foster democracy in countries?

There are four major explanations for why countries become democratic.

---

1. Structural Factors

Structural explanations focus on long-term social and economic conditions.

Economic Development

Seymour Martin Lipset argued:

The wealthier a country is, the more likely it is to sustain democracy.

Economic development can lead to:

• Higher living standards

• More education

• Higher literacy

• Urbanization

• A larger middle class

• More industrialization

These changes can create conditions that support democracy.

But there is a limitation:

Economic development does not automatically cause democracy.

Some wealthy countries, especially oil-rich countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia, remain authoritarian.

Oil wealth can allow authoritarian governments to:

• Reduce taxation

• Give citizens benefits

• Strengthen security forces

• Prevent democratic challenges

---

Social Inequality

High inequality can also make democratization more difficult.

Why?

Wealthy elites may fear democracy because they believe that poor voters will support:

• Higher taxes on the wealthy

• More redistribution

• More social programs

Therefore, wealthy elites may resist democratization.

⭐ Simple idea:

Economic development and lower inequality can create conditions that make democracy more likely, but neither guarantees democracy.

---

2. Institutional Factors

Institutions are the rules and structures of government.

Some institutions make democracy stronger, while others can make it fragile.

Presidential systems may be more vulnerable when:

• The president has too much power.

• The president's party does not control the legislature.

• The party system is highly fragmented.

• The military has a history of political intervention.

• The executive controls the legislature and judiciary.

Military regimes:

Military dictatorships are more likely to democratize because military leaders may eventually want to return to the barracks and preserve the unity of the military.

Single-party regimes:

These tend to be more durable because they have stronger institutions and organized parties.

⭐ Simple idea:

Strong democratic institutions and checks and balances can protect democracy, while institutions that concentrate power can make democracy vulnerable.

---

3. Political Actors

Political actors are the people and groups who actively make political choices.

This includes:

• Political leaders

• Political parties

• Social movements

• Civil society organizations

Democratization can happen when political leaders realize that they cannot completely defeat their opponents and agree to share power.

Democracy is more likely to succeed when:

• Leaders support democratic rules.

• Political groups cooperate.

• Opposition groups use peaceful strategies.

• Political parties defend democratic institutions.

Democracy is more likely to fail when:

• Leaders become extremely polarized.

• Moderate leaders fail to defend democracy.

• Political actors support authoritarian leaders.

• Leaders use democratic institutions to destroy democracy.

⭐ Simple idea:

People matter. Good political choices can help democracy grow, while destructive political choices can cause democracy to collapse.

---

4. International Forces

Countries are also influenced by events and actors outside their borders.

International forces can encourage democracy through:

• Foreign aid

• International organizations

• Regional organizations

• Democratic examples from neighboring countries

• International pressure

• Democracy promotion

This can create democratic diffusion or contagion, where democracy spreads from one country to another.

For example:

One country becomes democratic → people in neighboring countries see it → they become inspired to demand democratic change.

However, international influence alone is usually not enough.

The textbook emphasizes that domestic political actors and coalitions are still important.

⭐ Easy way to remember all four:

S-I-A-I

Structures → economic development and inequality
Institutions → political rules and systems
Actors → leaders, parties, and social movements
International → foreign influence and democratic diffusion

How would you describe authoritarian regimes? How is a personalist dictatorship different from a single-party regime?

What is an Authoritarian Regime?

An authoritarian regime is a political system where political power is concentrated in the hands of a leader or a small group, and citizens do not have the same meaningful political freedoms and competition found in democracies.

According to Barbara Geddes, authoritarian regimes can be categorized based on who controls political power.

The main types are:

• Personalist

• Single-party

• Military

• Hybrid combinations

---

Personalist Dictatorship vs. Single-Party Regime

	Personalist Dictatorship	Single-Party Regime
Who controls power?	One individual	One political party
Institutions	Weak and controlled by dictator	Stronger and more organized
Military	Leader weakens and controls it	Subordinate to the party
Legislature	Mostly a rubber stamp	Usually controlled by party supporters
Political parties	Often a personal organization	Party is central to governing
Decision-making	Based heavily on leader's personal choices	More consultation and institutional decision-making
Governance	Unpredictable and often arbitrary	More predictable and pragmatic
Economic performance	Often less predictable	Generally stronger economic performance
Stability	Can last a long time but is fragile after leader falls	Usually highly durable
Democratization	Least likely after regime collapse	More difficult because institutions are strong

---

🟥 Personalist Dictatorships

In a personalist dictatorship, one individual has most of the political power.

The dictator weakens institutions that could challenge them.

The leader may:

• Control the military

• Control the media

• Control the courts

• Weaken the legislature

• Use political parties as personal organizations

• Create a personality cult

The dictator often surrounds themselves with people who are extremely loyal.

They may also use divide-and-rule tactics, meaning they encourage divisions among groups so those groups cannot unite against the leader.

Governance performance:

Personalist regimes are often:

• Unpredictable

• Arbitrary

• Risk-taking

The dictator can make decisions based on personal preferences rather than institutional rules or expert advice.

Prospects for democratization:

Personalist regimes have the lowest likelihood of democratizing after the dictator falls.

Why?

Because the dictator often destroys or weakens institutions, leaving an institutional vacuum after they leave power.

The transition can therefore be:

• Chaotic

• Violent

• Unstable

---

🟦 Single-Party Regimes

In a single-party regime, one political party controls political power.

The leader is usually the head of the party, but the party itself has more power and organization than a personalist regime's party.

The party:

• Controls government institutions

• Controls much of political life

• Dominates the legislature

• Controls or influences the media

• Controls local government

• Keeps the military subordinate to the party

Governance performance:

Single-party regimes are generally:

• More institutionalized

• More predictable

• More stable

• More economically successful

Because decisions involve more consultation and multiple people within the party, policies are usually less dependent on one individual's personal whims.

The textbook says these regimes tend to have:

• The longest duration

• Fewest coups

• Higher economic growth

• More measured foreign policy

Prospects for democratization:

Single-party regimes are more resistant to democratization than military regimes because their institutions are strong and organized.

However, unlike personalist regimes, they have functioning institutions that can potentially help manage a transition.

⭐ Easy way to remember:

Personalist = One person

Single-party = One organized party

Personalist dictatorship:

Strong dictator + weak institutions = unpredictable rule and difficult transition

Single-party regime:

Strong party + stronger institutions = more stable and predictable rule

What is democratization? What are the waves of democratization? What is democratic backsliding?

What is Democratization?

Democratization is the process through which a country becomes more democratic.

This can involve:

• Establishing free and fair elections

• Expanding political participation

• Protecting civil liberties

• Creating responsible government

• Moving from authoritarian rule toward democracy

It can happen gradually or through a major political transition.

---

The Three Waves of Democratization

Political scientist Samuel Huntington described major historical periods when democracy expanded across many countries as waves of democratization.

---

🌊 First Wave

Approximate period:

19th century → around 1920

What happened?

Democratic principles spread through:

• North America

• Much of Western Europe

• Some South American countries

• Some Pacific countries

The wave slowed and reversed around 1920 as democracies faced threats from fascism and authoritarianism.

---

🌊 Second Wave

Approximate period:

End of World War II → around 1960

What happened?

After World War II:

• Western European countries re-established democracy.

• India became independent and democratic.

• Some Latin American countries overthrew dictatorships.

The wave ended as:

• Military interventions increased in Latin America.

• Fragile democracies collapsed.

• Military regimes emerged in parts of Africa.

---

🌊 Third Wave

Approximate period:

Mid-1970s → 1990s

This wave began with countries such as:

• Portugal

• Spain

• Greece

moving away from dictatorship.

Then, in the 1980s, many Latin American countries moved away from military rule.

In the 1990s, the collapse of the Soviet Union contributed to democratization in:

• Eastern Europe

• Parts of Africa

• Parts of Asia

⭐ Easy way to remember:

First Wave → 1800s to ~1920

Second Wave → After WWII to ~1960

Third Wave → 1970s–1990s

---

Why Do Waves Happen?

Democratization can spread through democratic diffusion or contagion.

For example:

Country A becomes democratic → people in Country B see the change → they become inspired to demand democracy → Country B begins democratizing.

International organizations and foreign governments can also encourage democracy through:

• Foreign aid

• Diplomatic pressure

• Regional organizations

However, the textbook emphasizes that international influences work best when domestic political actors are willing to support democratic change.

---

What is Democratic Backsliding?

Democratic backsliding is the gradual weakening or erosion of democracy.

The textbook defines it as:

The incremental erosion of democratic institutions, rules, and norms caused by actions of governments that were themselves elected.

This is important because backsliding does not necessarily happen through a sudden military coup.

Instead, it can happen slowly and legally.

Common signs include:

1. Extreme political polarization

2. Election of illiberal leaders

3. Weakening of fair elections

4. Restrictions on political rights

5. Attacks on civil liberties

6. Weakening the rule of law

7. Concentrating power in the executive branch

This concentration of power is sometimes called executive aggrandizement.

Example of how backsliding can happen:

A leader is elected democratically → gains control of the legislature → changes laws to weaken opposition → attacks independent institutions → limits civil liberties → concentrates more power in the executive.

The country may still hold elections, but the elections become less free and fair, and democratic institutions become weaker.

⭐ Easy way to remember:

Democratization = Democracy grows

Democratic backsliding = Democracy slowly weakens

What are some functions of legislatures as agents and principals?

Legislatures have three main functions:

• As agents of citizens: Legislatures act on behalf of the citizens they represent. Their functions include:

  • Linkage: Connecting citizens to the government by communicating citizens' demands to the central government and explaining government policies to citizens.

  • Representation: Representing constituents' opinions, values, interests, and needs in the policymaking process.

  • Debating: Providing a public forum where different opinions and opposing groups can debate issues, encourage compromise, and influence public opinion and policy.

  • Legitimation: Building public support for the government and its policies by representing citizens and allowing public debate.

• As principals overseeing the executive: Legislatures monitor and control the executive branch. Their functions include:

  • Control: Holding the executive accountable and, in parliamentary systems, potentially removing it through a vote of no confidence or censure.

  • Oversight: Monitoring executive agencies and the implementation of policies through question time, hearings, inquiries, investigative committees, and requests for reports.

  • Budget control: Controlling government spending and taxation, allowing legislatures to influence executive policies by approving, reducing, or withholding funding.

Key idea: An agent acts on behalf of a principal. Citizens are the principals who elect legislatures, while legislatures act as principals when monitoring the executive branch.

What is the difference between trustees and delegates?

• Delegate: A representative who is expected to follow the views and wishes of their constituents. They have little or no authority to use their own judgment when their personal opinions differ from the voters they represent. They act as an extension of the voters.

• Trustee: A representative who has more freedom to use their own judgment when representing their constituents. They rely on their own views, expertise, and experience to make decisions that they believe are in the best interests of their constituency.

Main difference: A delegate follows the voters' wishes, while a trustee uses their own judgment to represent the voters.

What are some ways in which unicameral legislatures differ from bicameral legislatures?

• Unicameral legislature: Has one chamber. All legislative powers are contained within that single chamber. They are more common in unitary political systems with relatively homogeneous populations, such as Denmark.

• Bicameral legislature: Has two chambers, usually a lower chamber and an upper chamber. The lower chamber usually represents the population as a whole, while the upper chamber often represents specific territorial or social groups, such as states or regions.

Bicameral systems can also differ based on how power is divided:

1. Equally shared powers: Both chambers can exercise all legislative powers.

2. Equally divided powers: Each chamber has different but roughly equally important powers.

3. Unequally distributed powers: One chamber has significantly more power than the other.

The first two are called symmetric bicameral systems, while the third is called an asymmetric bicameral system.

Key difference: Unicameral systems have one legislative chamber, while bicameral systems have two, which can provide greater representation for different social or territorial groups but may also make policymaking slower and require more compromise.

Are legislators free to perform their duties in all political systems? What factors influence legislators' degree of autonomy?

No. Legislators are not equally free to perform their duties in all political systems. Their autonomy depends on two main factors:

1. Institutional independence: How independent the legislature is from the executive branch.

   • In separation-of-powers (SoP) systems, the executive and legislature are elected separately. This gives the legislature greater independence and allows it to play a stronger role in policymaking.

   • In fused-powers systems, the legislature selects and maintains the executive. Because the government needs legislative support to remain in office, legislators have less freedom to oppose the executive's policies.

2. Individual/member independence: How much freedom individual legislators have from their political parties.

   • Centralized parties with strong party leaders tend to reduce legislators' autonomy because members may need to follow the party line to be reelected.

   • Decentralized parties give individual legislators more freedom to make independent decisions.

   • Electoral systems also matter. Candidate-centered elections, such as single-member districts, can increase legislators' independence because they can rely on personal support from voters. Party-centered proportional representation systems generally give political parties more influence.

   • Campaign financing also affects autonomy. Accessible state funding can make it easier for candidates to run independently or form new parties, increasing their independence from party leadership.

Key idea: Legislative autonomy depends on both institutional independence from the executive and individual independence from political parties.

What are the three constitutional forms?

The three constitutional forms are:

1. Absolutist Constitution

   • Power to create and change laws and the constitution is centralized in the rulers.

   • Rulers are considered "above the law."

   • Typically rejects popular sovereignty, individual rights, and separation of powers.

2. Legislative Supremacy Constitution

   • Legislative authority is supreme.

   • Elections legitimize the legislature, and legislative majorities legitimize laws.

   • The constitution is not entrenched, meaning the legislature can change it through ordinary legislative procedures.

   • Courts generally cannot invalidate legislation through judicial review.

   • The legislature is not constitutionally limited by a protected list of rights.

3. Higher Law Constitution

   • The constitution is the highest law and limits the power of the legislature.

   • Includes a charter of rights that protects individual rights.

   • Establishes an independent system of constitutional justice.

   • The constitution is entrenched, meaning changing it requires more difficult procedures than passing ordinary laws.

   • Constitutional courts or judges can review laws for constitutionality.

Easy way to remember:
Type 1 = Rulers are supreme
Type 2 = Legislature is supreme
Type 3 = Constitution is supreme

What is constitutional review? How do the judicial review system and constitutional court system differ? What are the three constitutional review processes?

Constitutional review is the process of determining whether laws or government actions are consistent with the constitution.

Judicial Review vs. Constitutional Court System

• Judicial review system (U.S. model):

  • Constitutional review can be performed by all courts.

  • A constitutional issue usually arises during an actual legal case when a person argues that their rights have been violated.

  • The case can move through different levels of courts, eventually reaching the Supreme Court, which has the final say.

• Constitutional court system (European/Kelsenian model):

  • A specialized constitutional court is responsible for deciding whether laws are constitutional.

  • Ordinary courts generally cannot independently invalidate laws as unconstitutional.

  • Constitutional questions can be referred to the constitutional court through specific procedures.

The Three Constitutional Review Processes

1. Abstract Review

   • Reviews a law before it is applied.

   • It may occur before a law enters into force (a priori) or after it is passed but before it is applied (a posteriori).

   • Its purpose is to prevent unconstitutional laws from causing harm.

   • Executives, parliamentary minorities, and regional or federal governments may have the power to refer laws for review.

2. Concrete Review

   • Begins during an actual court case.

   • An ordinary judge refers a constitutional question to the constitutional court when the issue is important to the case and the judge has reasonable doubts about the law's constitutionality.

   • The constitutional court decides the constitutional question, and the ordinary judge then uses that decision to resolve the case.

3. Constitutional Complaint

   • Allows individuals or an ombudsman to directly appeal to a constitutional court when they believe their constitutional rights have been violated.

   • It is known by different names in different countries, including amparo in Latin America.

Easy way to remember:
Abstract = Review before application
Concrete = Review during a court case
Constitutional complaint = Individual directly claims rights violation

What are the three major things that define an electoral system (building blocks of electoral systems)?

The three key building blocks of an electoral system are:

1. Electoral Formula

The electoral formula is the method used to convert votes into seats in the legislature or parliament.

There are two main types:

• Majoritarian system: The candidate or party that receives a plurality or majority of votes wins the seat. This is based on a "winner-take-all" principle. The winner gets the seat, while the votes for losing candidates do not result in representation.

  • Usually uses single-member districts

  • Often produces two-party or few-party competition

• Proportional Representation (PR): The percentage of votes a party receives is converted into a roughly corresponding percentage of seats in the legislature.

  • Allows multiple political voices to be represented

  • Usually produces multiparty systems

  • Often leads to coalition governments

2. Electoral Districts

An electoral district is a geographic area where votes are counted and legislative seats are allocated.

Important features include:

• Territorial contiguity: All parts of the district should be connected.

• Compactness: Districts should generally not have unusually or oddly shaped boundaries.

• District magnitude: The number of seats available in a district. This is one of the most important parts of an electoral system.

  • Majoritarian systems usually use single-member districts.

  • PR systems usually use multi-member districts.

  • Generally, larger districts produce more proportional results.

Upper-tier districts can also be added to help correct distortions caused by geographic districts.

3. Legal Threshold

The legal threshold is the minimum number or percentage of votes a party needs to receive in order to win its first seat in the legislature.

• If a party receives fewer votes than the threshold, those votes are wasted.

• A higher threshold can make it harder for small parties to win seats.

• Voters may abandon smaller parties if they believe those parties cannot reach the threshold.

• Under PR, the threshold is usually a percentage of valid votes.

Quick answer to memorize:

The three building blocks of electoral systems are:

1. Electoral formula – how votes become seats.

2. Electoral districts – where votes are counted and how many seats each district has.

3. Legal threshold – the minimum support needed to win a seat.

What is the difference between majority voting and plurality voting? Which system does the U.S. practice when voting for legislators?

Plurality Voting

Under plurality voting, the candidate who receives the largest number of votes wins, even if they do not receive more than 50% of the votes.

Example:

• Candidate A: 40%

• Candidate B: 35%

• Candidate C: 25%

Candidate A wins because they received the most votes, even though 60% of voters voted for someone else.

Plurality voting is commonly used in single-member districts and can result in many wasted votes and less proportional representation.

Majority Voting

Under majority voting, a candidate must receive more than 50% of the votes to win.

If no candidate receives a majority, a runoff election is held, usually between the two leading candidates.

Example:

• Candidate A: 40%

• Candidate B: 35%

• Candidate C: 25%

No one has a majority, so Candidate A and Candidate B would compete in a runoff. The winner of the runoff must receive a majority.

A supermajority requires an even higher percentage than 50%.

Which system does the U.S. use for legislative elections?

The United States generally uses plurality voting for legislative elections, with legislators elected from single-member districts. The candidate with the most votes wins, even if they do not receive more than 50%.

Quick comparison:

Plurality Voting	Majority Voting
Most votes wins	More than 50% required
Majority is not necessary	Majority is required
Usually no runoff	Runoff if no candidate gets a majority
Used for U.S. legislative elections	Used in systems such as France's presidential election

Easy way to remember:

Plurality = most votes.
Majority = more than half.

What is the difference between descriptive and substantive representation?

Descriptive Representation

Descriptive representation focuses on whether representatives "stand for" or resemble the people they represent.

The representative is evaluated based on their characteristics or identity, such as:

• Gender

• Ethnic origin

• Other characteristics shared with the population they represent

The more the representatives resemble the people they represent, the greater the level of descriptive representation.

Example:
If a legislature has a population that is 50% women, descriptive representation would consider how closely the legislature's percentage of women reflects that population.

Key idea:
Descriptive representation = Who the representative is.

---

Substantive Representation

Substantive representation focuses on what representatives actually do for the people they represent.

It evaluates whether representatives:

• Act in the interests of their constituents

• Vote in ways that reflect their constituents' interests

• Create policies that benefit or represent their constituents

• Legislate on behalf of the people they represent

This means the representative acts with agency on behalf of the represented.

Key idea:
Substantive representation = What the representative does.

Quick comparison:

Descriptive Representation	Substantive Representation
Focuses on who the representative is	Focuses on what the representative does
Representative resembles the people	Representative acts in the interests of the people
Based on characteristics such as gender or ethnicity	Based on actions such as voting, legislating, and policymaking
"Stands for" the represented	"Acts for" the represented

Easy way to remember:

Descriptive = "Do they look like/reflect the people?"
Substantive = "Do they act for the people?"

What are democratic innovations? What are the three traditions of democratic innovations? Give one example of each.

Definition

Democratic innovations are practices specifically designed to increase and deepen citizen participation in political decision-making.

They give citizens opportunities to influence political outcomes beyond simply voting in elections. They allow ordinary people to directly participate in shaping laws, policies, and political decisions instead of leaving all decisions to elected representatives and experts.

The Three Traditions

Tradition	Main Idea	Example
Direct Democracy	Citizens directly vote on or participate in decisions and laws.	Referendum
Participatory Democracy	Citizens directly participate in making decisions about public matters.	Participatory budgeting
Deliberative Democracy	Citizens come together to discuss issues, consider evidence and different viewpoints, and make recommendations.	Citizens' assembly

1. Direct Democracy

Direct democracy gives citizens a direct role in making political decisions.

• Citizens can vote directly on an issue instead of having only elected representatives decide.

• A major example is a referendum, where the public directly votes on a specific issue or measure.

• Referendums can be binding or advisory.

• They can also be obligatory (legally required) or optional.

Example: The 2016 Brexit referendum, where UK voters were asked whether they wanted to remain in or leave the European Union.

Easy way to remember:
Direct = Citizens directly decide.

2. Participatory Democracy

Participatory democracy argues that democracy works best when people actively participate in governing themselves in public matters.

It is about giving citizens a direct role in decision-making rather than only participating through elections.

Example: Participatory budgeting

• Citizens discuss the needs of their communities.

• They develop proposals for how public money should be spent.

• They deliberate about which projects should receive funding.

• Examples include infrastructure projects, clinics, addiction support groups, and livelihood programs.

Easy way to remember:
Participatory = Citizens participate in decisions.

3. Deliberative Democracy

Deliberative democracy involves bringing together a diverse group of citizens to discuss public issues as equals.

Citizens:

• Listen to different perspectives.

• Examine evidence.

• Consider arguments and values.

• Discuss issues respectfully.

• Develop collective recommendations.

A common example is a deliberative minipublic, such as a citizens' assembly.

Participants are often chosen through sortition, or random selection, so the group can reflect the diversity of the larger population.

Example: The French Citizens' Convention for Climate, where 150 randomly selected citizens discussed and developed proposals for reducing carbon emissions.

Easy way to remember:
Deliberative = Citizens discuss and deliberate before deciding/recommending.

⭐ Quick Memory Trick

D-P-D:

• Direct → Vote directly

• Participatory → Participate directly

• Deliberative → Discuss and deliberate

There are three debates on democratic innovations. Clearly explain one of them.

One major debate is the debate over citizen competence.

Citizen Competence Debate

The debate asks whether ordinary citizens have the ability to understand complex political issues, process information, and make good political decisions.

The Argument Against Citizen Competence

Some scholars argue that citizens are not competent enough to make complex political decisions.

• Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels argue that even informed citizens often base their political decisions on partisan loyalties rather than objective facts.

• Citizens may change how they interpret facts to match the political party they support.

• Jason Brennan makes an even stronger argument, claiming that many citizens are incompetent, irrational, and unreasonable about politics.

• From this perspective, democratic innovations could be dangerous because they allow incompetent citizens to make decisions that affect everyone.

The Argument in Defense of Citizens

Supporters of democratic innovations argue that citizens do not need to know everything about every issue to make competent decisions.

Citizens can rely on trusted information proxies, such as:

• Public figures

• Social movements

• Opinion-makers

• Social media influencers

• Experts and other sources of information

Democratic innovations can also be designed to help citizens become more informed.

Example: Oregon Citizens' Initiative Review (CIR)

In Oregon, 24 randomly selected citizens are given the opportunity to study and deliberate about ballot measures.

During the process, they:

1. Learn about the issue.

2. Examine evidence.

3. Listen to independent experts.

4. Hear arguments from both sides.

5. Deliberate together.

6. Produce a one-page statement explaining their findings.

This statement is included in the Oregon State Voters' Pamphlet, allowing voters to use the citizens' findings when making their own decisions.

Main Point

The debate is essentially about whether citizens are too uninformed or irrational to make political decisions or whether well-designed democratic institutions can help citizens become informed and make thoughtful decisions.

⭐ Study Answer

The citizen competence debate asks whether ordinary citizens are capable of making informed decisions about complex political issues. Critics such as Achen, Bartels, and Brennan argue that citizens often rely on partisan loyalties and may be incompetent or irrational. Supporters argue that citizens can use trusted information proxies and that democratic innovations can create spaces where people receive information, hear opposing viewpoints, and deliberate before making decisions. The Oregon Citizens' Initiative Review is an example because randomly selected citizens study ballot measures and provide voters with an informed summary of the issue.

What are the four major functions of political parties?

The four major functions of political parties are:

1. Coordination

Political parties coordinate political activity.

They:

• Maintain discipline and communication within the parliamentary party.

• Coordinate parliamentary action in support of or opposition to the government.

• Organize politically like-minded citizens.

• Connect elected representatives with organized supporters.

• Coordinate political activity among party members.

Simple meaning: Parties help politicians and supporters work together toward common goals.

---

2. Conducting Electoral Campaigns and Structuring Competition

Political parties organize elections and make political competition easier for voters to understand.

They:

• Provide candidates.

• Connect candidates with recognizable party symbols and histories.

• Develop policy programs.

• Recruit and coordinate campaign workers.

• Structure electoral competition.

Simple meaning: Parties organize elections and give voters recognizable choices.

---

3. Selection and Recruitment of Personnel

Political parties help choose and recruit people for political positions.

They:

• Select candidates for elections.

• Recruit candidates for appointed offices.

• Recruit and socialize political activists.

• Develop potential future officeholders.

Simple meaning: Parties find and prepare people for political office.

---

4. Representation

Political parties represent citizens and groups in government.

They:

• Speak for members and supporters to government agencies.

• Represent demographic or ideological groups in the political system.

Simple meaning: Parties give citizens and groups a political voice.

⭐ Memory Trick

C-E-S-R

• Coordination

• Elections/Campaigns

• Selection and Recruitment

• Representation

Describe one way in which parties stabilize (or destabilize) democracies.

How Parties Stabilize Democracies: Integration of Citizens

One important way political parties stabilize democracy is by integrating newly enfranchised citizens into the political system.

When more people gain the right to vote, political parties help bring these new voters into established patterns of political competition.

For example:

• Parties appeal to new voters based on their identities and interests.

• They organize and mobilize citizens.

• They give citizens a way to participate in politics.

• They help channel political disagreements into elections and peaceful political competition.

In immigrant societies, political parties have also helped integrate immigrants into their new countries.

Why This Can Stabilize Democracy

When suffrage expands gradually, existing political parties often have time to adapt to the new voters. This can prevent demagogues or revolutionary movements from gaining large amounts of support.

However, when suffrage expands very quickly, political parties may struggle to adapt. This can contribute to political instability and even democratic collapse.

⭐ Study Answer

Political parties can stabilize democracy by integrating newly enfranchised citizens into the political system. They organize and mobilize new voters and encourage them to participate through established forms of political competition. When parties successfully integrate new citizens, they can prevent political conflict from becoming destabilizing. However, if parties fail to integrate new voters, rapid political mobilization can contribute to radicalization and democratic instability.

How do parties of internal origin differ compared to parties of external origin?

The main difference is where the parties originated and whom they initially represented.

Internal Origin	External Origin
Developed inside representative/parliamentary assemblies	Developed outside parliament
Generally appeared earlier	Developed later
Often represented the establishment and upper/upper-middle classes	Often represented middle, lower-middle, and working classes
Developed from parliamentary factions	Developed from groups excluded from political participation
Often connected to existing political elites	Often mobilized excluded groups demanding political rights

Parties of Internal Origin

These parties developed within parliament.

They originated from parliamentary factions and gradually developed:

• Recognizable leaders

• Party organizations

• Electoral campaigns

They played an important role in establishing parliamentary government, where ministers became responsible to the parties controlling the parliamentary majority rather than directly to the monarch.

They were often associated with:

• The upper and upper-middle classes

• The nobility and gentry

• Established political elites

Parties of External Origin

These parties developed outside parliament.

They emerged because large groups of people were excluded from political participation and needed organizations to demand political reforms and expanded political rights.

They often represented:

• Working classes

• Lower-middle classes

• Dissenting religious groups

• Marginalized language groups

• Opponents of old regimes

These parties helped push established political systems toward broader suffrage and democracy.

⭐ Easy Way to Remember

Internal = Inside Parliament
External = Outside Parliament

⭐ Study Answer

Parties of internal origin developed within representative assemblies and initially tended to represent established elites and upper or upper-middle classes. Parties of external origin developed outside parliament among groups excluded from political participation, such as working-class and marginalized groups, and sought to gain political representation and expand political rights.

What is a party system and explain how any two types of party systems come about.

What is a Party System?

A party system refers to the pattern of competition and interaction among political parties in a country.

The two main elements of a party system are:

1. The number of competing parties

2. The size/strength of those parties

Party systems can be studied based on:

• The votes parties receive.

• The seats they win in parliament.

• The electoral system that translates votes into seats.

There are four main democratic party systems:

1. Dominant-party

2. Two-party

3. Multiparty

4. Bipolar

Below are two types and how they come about.

---

Type 1: Two-Party System

A two-party system occurs when two large, relatively balanced parties dominate political competition.

Characteristics:

• Two major parties have similar levels of support.

• They have roughly equal chances of winning elections.

• They tend to alternate in power.

• The winning party usually forms a single-party government.

• Smaller parties may exist but are usually not necessary to form a government.

How does it come about?

Two-party systems are strongly associated with plurality electoral systems, especially first-past-the-post (FPTP) in single-member districts.

Under plurality:

• Only the candidate with the most votes wins the seat.

• Smaller parties have difficulty winning seats.

• Voters may vote strategically for a larger party to avoid wasting their vote.

• Small parties may merge with larger parties to increase their chances of winning.

This creates a tendency toward two major parties.

Example: The United States, where Republicans and Democrats have dominated national politics.

Easy way to remember:

Plurality/FPTP → Smaller parties struggle → Two major parties

---

Type 2: Multiparty System

A multiparty system occurs when several parties compete, with no single party winning a majority of votes or seats.

Characteristics:

• There are many parties of different sizes.

• No single party has an overall majority.

• Parties usually run separately in elections.

• Parties form coalitions after elections.

• Governments are usually coalition governments.

How does it come about?

Multiparty systems are strongly associated with proportional representation (PR).

Under PR:

• Parties receive seats based more closely on their share of votes.

• Smaller parties have a better chance of winning seats.

• Voters can vote for their preferred party without worrying as much about wasting their vote.

• Small parties do not have as much incentive to merge with larger parties.

This allows multiple parties to survive and compete.

Example: Belgium, the Netherlands, and Finland.

Easy way to remember:

PR → Smaller parties can win seats → Multiple parties survive

---

⭐ Super Important Comparison

Two-Party	Multiparty
Two major parties dominate	Several parties compete
Usually plurality/FPTP	Usually PR
Single-party government	Coalition government
Frequent alternation between two parties	Government changes often through coalition changes
Smaller parties struggle	Smaller parties can win seats
More likely to moderate policies	More room for niche or ideological parties

What is Duverger's Law? What does it predict about the relationship between electoral systems and the number of political parties?

Definition

Duverger's Law explains the relationship between electoral systems and party systems.

The basic prediction is:

Plurality or majoritarian electoral systems tend to produce two-party systems, while proportional representation tends to produce multiparty systems.

Duverger's First Law

Plurality/majority single-ballot systems tend to produce party dualism, or two-party competition.

In other words:

Plurality + Single-Member Districts → Two-Party System

Duverger's Second Law

Second-ballot majority systems or proportional representation tend to produce multiparty systems.

In other words:

PR → Multiparty System

---

Why Does This Happen?

There are two main effects:

1. Mechanical Effects

This refers to how the electoral system translates votes into seats.

Under plurality/FPTP:

• Each district usually has one seat.

• Only the candidate with the most votes wins.

• Other candidates receive no seat.

• Smaller parties have difficulty getting representation.

This reduces the number of parties that win seats.

Under PR:

• Districts have multiple seats.

• Seats are distributed more proportionally according to votes.

• Smaller parties can win seats.

This allows more parties to enter parliament.

---

2. Psychological Effects

This refers to how voters and political parties change their behavior because of the electoral system.

Voters:

Under plurality systems, voters may vote strategically.

They may not vote for their first-choice party because they believe that party cannot win. Instead, they vote for a larger party that has a better chance of winning.

This reduces support for small parties.

Under PR, voters are more likely to vote sincerely for their preferred party, because smaller parties have a better chance of winning seats.

Political Parties:

Under plurality systems, small parties may have an incentive to merge with larger parties to improve their chances of winning.

Under PR, small parties can survive independently because they can win seats without merging.

---

Important Qualification

Duverger's Law does not mean that every plurality system will always have exactly two parties nationally.

The text explains that the national two-party effect is strongest when parties are nationalized, meaning they have relatively homogeneous support across different districts.

If a small party has strongly concentrated regional support, it can win seats in particular areas even if it has little support nationally.

Therefore:

Plurality systems tend toward two-party competition, but strong regional parties can lead to more than two parties at the national level.

---

⭐ Study Answer

Duverger's Law predicts that electoral systems influence the number of political parties. Plurality or majoritarian electoral systems using single-member districts tend to produce two-party systems, while proportional representation tends to produce multiparty systems. This occurs because of mechanical and psychological effects. Mechanically, plurality systems make it difficult for small parties to win seats, while PR allows them to gain representation. Psychologically, voters in plurality systems often vote strategically for larger parties, and small parties have incentives to merge. Under PR, voters can vote sincerely for smaller parties, and those parties can survive independently. However, plurality systems do not always produce exactly two parties nationally, especially when regional parties have concentrated support.