Introduction to Comparative Politics and Political Theory

Defining Comparative Politics

  • Comparative politics is a subfield of political science that explains the variation in political outcomes across different countries or units.

  • It is the systematic study of why political phenomena differ—or remain the same—across various cases.

  • The term "Comparative" refers to comparing different cases to build broader theories of governance.

  • The term "Politics" is derived from the Greek word politikos, meaning "of or relating to the polis" or the city-state.

Historical Foundations of Comparative Politics

Aristotle and the Medieval Ages

  • Aristotle is frequently credited as the father of political science. In his work Politics, he was among the first to utilize comparative methods to analyze the competing Greek city-states of his time.

  • Aristotle classified governments based on the number of rulers and whether the government was an ideal form or a perverted form:

    • One Ruler: Monarchy (Ideal) vs. Tyranny (Perverted).

    • Few Rulers: Aristocracy (Ideal) vs. Oligarchy (Perverted).

    • Many Rulers: Polity (Ideal) vs. Democracy (Perverted).

  • Following this period, the study of comparative politics entered a state of dormancy during the Medieval Ages. During this time, the focus shifted away from the comparison of city-states and toward theological justifications for authority.

Renaissance Resurgence and Realism

  • Comparative study reemerged during the Renaissance, most notably with Niccolo Machiavelli. His work represented a decisive shift toward political realism.

  • Writing in early sixteenth-century Florence during a period of chaotic and violent Italian state politics, Machiavelli moved away from how rulers ought to behave and focused on how they actually behave.

19th and Early 20th Century Developments

  • Max Weber, a German sociologist, shifted the focus of political inquiry from whether a ruler was "good" or "bad" to why people accept the authority of those who rule them.

  • Weber explored the distinctions between power, authority, and legitimacy.

  • He highlighted the central role of bureaucracy in modern governance, arguing that complex societies require rational, rule-based administration to function properly.

Later Movements and the Behavioral Revolution

  • Charles de Montesquieu, an eighteenth-century French thinker known for The Spirit of the Laws, compared the governments of various nations. He linked their political forms to external factors such as climate, geography, and social customs.

  • Early efforts in the field were primarily descriptive. Scholars aimed to categorize different regimes and document their methods of governance.

  • In the 1950s and 1960s, the behavioral revolution emerged as a response to the limitations of traditional descriptive analysis.

  • This movement emphasized quantitative methods, statistical analysis, and the systematic study of the behavior of individuals and groups within politics.

Systematic Theory in Comparative Politics: Boix and Stokes (2007)

Guiding Principles of the Field

  • Research in comparative politics is guided by the belief that political analysis can build a systematic and cumulative body of theory.

  • Scholars are encouraged to embrace a "Catholic approach," meaning no single method (qualitative or quantitative) should dominate the field.

  • Modern theories have shifted toward micro-foundations, starting with the individual rather than broad systemic forces like social class, economic development, or historical structures found in sociology or Marxism.

  • There is increased confidence in building general theories, balanced by caution regarding the tools used to test them, such as the use of quasi-experiments.

  • A major unsolved problem in the field remains the definitive origin of institutions and norms.

Core Research Areas and Methodologies

  • Theories and Methods:

    • Scholars utilize a methodological toolkit including case studies versus large-N statistical analysis (Gerring).
    • Field research remains vital (Wood).
    • Comparative historical analysis is used to understand long-term developments (Mahoney and Villegas).
    • Quantitative techniques are employed, though they face limits such as multicausality, context-conditionality, and endogeneity (Franzese).
    • Causal inference in observational research remains a deep challenge (Przeworski).
    • The field uses game-theoretic and rationalist approaches (Bates) and collective action theory, which has shifted toward boundedly rational models of behavior (Ostrom).

  • States, State Formation, and Political Consent:

    • This includes theories on how states form (Spruyt) and the limitations of using "legitimacy" as an explanatory concept (Hardin).
    • It covers the origins of national identity (Greenfeld and Eastwood) and ethnic conflict (Varshney).

  • Political Regimes and Transitions:

    • Research explores mass beliefs and their role in democratization (Welzel and Inglehart).
    • Scholars analyze competing theories on what causes democratization (Geddes).
    • The role of civic culture and social capital is examined (Sabetti), alongside the internal logic of dictatorships (Wintrobe).

  • Political Instability and Conflict:

    • This covers the causes of revolutions (Pincus) and the endogeneity problems present in civil war research (Kalyvas).
    • It includes the study of contentious politics and social movements (Tarrow and Tilly; Lichbach and de Vries).

  • Mass Political Mobilization:

    • Research looks into the origins of party systems (Boix) and provides a broad review of party competition (Kitschelt).
    • Studies track the shift toward candidate-centered, media-driven campaigns (Wren and McElwain).
    • The roles of clientelism, patronage (Hagopian; Stokes), and political activism (Norris) are emphasized.

  • Processing Political Demands:

    • Conceptual focus has shifted toward accountability and representation via preference aggregation (Powell).
    • Specific institutional mechanisms studied include electoral systems (Taagepera), separation of powers (Samuels), judicial independence (Ferejohn, Rosenbluth, and Shipan), federalism (Beramendi), and coalition formation (Strom and Nyblade).

  • Governance in Comparative Perspective:

    • This includes economic voting (Duch) and political business cycles (Alt and Rose).
    • Analysts look at the welfare state (Carnes and Mares) and why poor democracies may underperform (Keefer).
    • Limits to accountability (Maravall) and market reform in post-communist states (Frye) are key topics.

Comparative Politics vs. International Relations

International Relations (IR)

  • International Relations focuses on the interactions between states and other international actors.

  • Key topics include war and peace, diplomacy, alliances, trade agreements, foreign policy, and international institutions like the UN and WTO.

  • In IR, the state is generally treated as a single actor operating within an international system characterized by anarchy, meaning there is no overarching authority (as theorized by Waltz).

Comparative Politics (CP)

  • Comparative Politics focuses on politics within states.

  • It compares these internal processes across many countries to find patterns.

  • Key topics include why some countries democratize while others do not, differences in party systems, the functioning of elections and institutions, the causes of civil wars, and variations in welfare states.

  • In CP, the state is "opened up" and examined from the inside; these internal characteristics are compared across many states to build general explanations.