AL

Notes on Social vs. Material Explanations (POLS 1402)

Social vs. Material Explanations

  • POLS 1402 content focuses on contrasting material explanations (concrete, measurable factors) with social explanations (emotional, ideological, rhetorical, symbolic factors).
  • Both approaches can explain international outcomes, and they are often interrelated.
  • The slides provide definitions, examples, and case studies to illustrate how each type of explanation can account for events like war, stability, and regional order.

Key Concepts: Variables, Causality, and Explanations

  • Independent variable (IV) = cause
  • Dependent variable (DV) = outcome or effect
  • In an explanation, we specify how the IV affects the DV: IV → DV (Cause → Effect)
  • Notation:
    • \text{IV} \rightarrow \text{DV}
    • \text{Cause} \rightarrow \text{Effect}
  • Example: Type of government (regime type) → war or no war

Material Explanations

  • Definition: Explanations based on concrete, measurable factors that can usually be quantified.
  • Examples:
    • Economy: Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
    • Military size and weapons capabilities (including non-conventional ones)
    • Population and demographic factors (e.g., minority groups)
    • Geography
    • Natural resources
  • Example statements:
    • "The United States is a superpower because of its massive economy."
    • "German aggression in WWI and WWII was an inevitable result of Germany’s vulnerable geographic position."
    • "The security situation in Iraq is shaped by the three major ethnic groups – Shiite Arabs, Sunni Arabs, and Kurds."
  • Note: The material account emphasizes tangible, countable factors that shape power and outcomes.

Social Explanations

  • Definition: Explanations based on emotional, ideological, rhetorical, or symbolic factors that are harder to measure.
  • Social factors are often represented by physical entities or institutions (e.g., parties, media, symbols).
  • Examples:
    • Ideas, ideology, symbols, images, words, rhetoric, speeches
    • Media content, films, concepts, intentions, identity, perceptions
  • Example statements:
    • "The United States is a superpower because of its commitment to the democratic ideal."
    • "German aggression in WWI and WWII resulted from expansionist ideas."
    • "The security situation in Iraq is shaped by interpretations of Islam (religious ideas)."

End of Cold War: Social vs. Material (Late 1980s)

  • 1) USSR could not keep up economically; Cold War was bankrupting the Soviet Union.
  • 2) Soviet leaders grew comfortable with Western ideas (open government, free market) as the better way to organize the economy.
  • 3) The US military machine was very powerful, pressuring the USSR to back down.
  • Takeaway: Both material (economic/military) and social (ideational openness) factors interact in explaining the end of the Cold War.

Caveat: Difficulties in Separating Social and Material Factors

  • It is not always easy to separate social and material factors; they are often inter-related.
  • Examples referenced: census and counting methods in the reading illustrate how social and demographic data can influence explanations.

Case Study: Alabama church burning (2006)

  • Alabama, Morning Star Missionary Baptist Church, Boligee, AL (est. 1912)
  • Reverend James Posey: “They can’t stop the church. The church will be victorious. You can’t put God’s church out of business. You can burn the structure down but the church is in the hearts of the people.”
  • Source: NPR, February 12, 2006
  • Takeaway: A social and symbolic interpretation of events (faith, identity, community resilience) can shape outcomes and responses beyond material destruction.

Case Study: Milkshakes and ghrelin (advertising vs. physiology)

  • Visuals show a milkshake advertisement with two labels: a “Sensishake” with 1041 calories and other marketing cues like "GUILT FREE" and "YOU DESERVE" indulgence.
  • Later slides contrast advertised calories (1041) with actual calories (300).
  • Ghrelin level after shake: reported decrease (104) and a decline in perceived indulgence (620), with a note of a 3x decrease.
  • Takeaway: Marketing (social/psychological factors) interacts with physiology (material factors) to influence consumer behavior and perceptions; a clear example of how social explanations (perceptions, symbols) can affect outcomes alongside material facts (calorie content).

Social v Material: Three Short Examples

  • 1) International Stability
  • 2) Globalization
  • 3) Third Rock from the Sun (cultural/imagined scenarios in a TV show)
  • These illustrate how social and cultural narratives interact with material power and institutions to shape global outcomes.

What Explains International Stability?

  • Core idea: Absence of great power war.
  • Question: Balance (or equilibrium) what exactly?
  • This leads to two influential conceptions of balance:
    • Balance of Power (Capacities-focused)
    • Balance of Threat (Capabilities + Intent)
  • The discussion introduces the debate on what factors keep great powers from engaging in large-scale conflict.

Balance Theories: Power vs. Threat

  • Kenneth Waltz – Balance of Power: Focus on capabilities across great powers as the primary driver of stability.
  • Stephen Walt – Balance of Threat: Focus on both capabilities and intent (threat perceptions) as the driver of stability or danger.
  • Conceptual takeaway: Different emphases (power capabilities vs. threat perceptions) can explain similar stability outcomes.

Waltz vs. Balance-of-Threat Visuals

  • Waltz: Balance of Power (emphasizes distributions of capabilities)
  • Walt: Balance of Threat (emphasizes both capabilities and perceived intent)
  • The slides suggest both approaches are part of a broader discussion on how states manage risk and maintain stability.

What is Globalization?

  • A concept introduced for later discussion (to be revisited later in the course).
  • Anticipated to tie into how interconnected economies and flows of information affect material and social explanations.

Third Rock from the Sun (Pop culture vignette)

  • Summary of a TV show clip: Dick, Mary, and colleagues explore relationships and social dynamics; a commentary on how people navigate social arrangements and environments.
  • Relevance: Illustrates how social narratives and identities shape actors’ choices and power dynamics in a lighthearted context.

Longer Political Science Example #1: Lustick (1997)

  • Question: Why are there great powers in Europe but not in the Middle East?
    • Europe: France, Germany, Russia, United Kingdom are great powers.
    • Middle East: no single state with comparable economic, military, and political power.
  • Core question: What does it take to become a great power?

Consolidation of Smaller States: A European Path to Great Power Status

  • After the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire in Europe, state consolidation occurred through wars and unifications (e.g., Germany, United Kingdom).
  • Key points:
    • There was no international law against unification in this historical context.
    • No stronger powers to intervene to stop consolidation.
  • This historical trajectory helped explain why Europe produced powerful states, unlike the Middle East in the same era.

Historical Map Context (German Empire and Surrounding Regions)

  • The map shows German territories and neighboring states around 1870–1871 (pre- and post-unification context).
  • Notes: Key players and regions included Prussia, various German states, and European neighbors; the unification culminated in the German Empire in 1871.

Notable Conclusion: NOT in the Middle East (Lustick)

  • The Middle East lacked a parallel process of consolidation due to colonial influence and international norms.
  • Colonialism and international law shaped outcomes differently in the ME, limiting autonomous great-power formation.
  • The slide argues that external powers and normative frameworks (UN, international law) constrained a purely internal path to great-power status in the region.

Lustick’s Takeaway: Power and Norms

  • Lustick’s story emphasizes that both material power and social norms matter for explaining state status and regional dynamics.
  • The synthesis suggests that explaining international outcomes requires considering both dimensions (material and social).

Longer Political Science Example #2: Barnett (1995)

  • Question: What explains the emergence of regional order in the Arab Middle East (circa 1900–2000), focusing on post-1967 dynamics?
  • Barnett’s framing: What constitutes “order” in a region? Shared expectations, norms, and rules among states.
  • Core concept: Sovereignty as a test of regional order.
    • Sovereignty = authority over domestic space, legitimacy in the international community, and non-interference (live-and-let-live attitude).

Barnett’s Cases: Sovereignty and Regional Order

  • 1940s–1967: Arab states did not respect each other’s sovereignty; regional disorder prevailed.
  • 1967 onward: Greater order emerged as states began to respect sovereignty and non-interference norms.
  • Key question: Why did this shift occur after 1967?

Why the Initial Lack of Sovereignty Respect? Pan-Arabism

  • Pan-Arabism aimed to unite all Arab states into a single political unit, opposing the existence of separate states (e.g., Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Syria).

Why the Shift After 1967? State-Centered Economies and Social Interactions

  • State-centered economy (etatism): Each state built a more centralized economic model.
  • Use of war as a means to build national identity (military symbolism, holidays, monuments, textbooks).
  • Social interactions among Arab states led to fear and suspicion, which hindered unification rather than promoting it.

Social vs. Material Explanations in Barnett’s Framework

  • Three explanatory channels for (dis)order:
    • Power (Realism): Emphasis on material power and capabilities.
    • Institutions (Neo-liberal Institutionalism): Emphasis on rules, norms, and structures that govern interaction.
    • Social/Constructivist (Barnett): Emphasis on ideas, identities, and shared understandings shaping state behavior.
  • Barnett highlights that social processes (interactions, norms) can influence regional order beyond raw material power.

Levels of Analysis & Social/Material (Overview)

  • A framework linking material and social explanations across three levels:
    • First Image: Individual leaders and psychology.
    • Second Image: Domestic politics, institutions, and regimes.
    • Third Image: International system and structural factors (power distribution, alliances, norms).
  • This tri-level framework helps parsimoniously categorize explanations as material or social.

Can We Change the World? (Closing Reflection)

  • The discussion invites students to consider how social and material explanations can be leveraged to understand and potentially alter international outcomes.