National and State Gov
Overview: What governments do and how politics is studied
Instructor emphasizes not teaching partisan superiority; focus on understanding how government works and political concepts.
Politics studied through concrete examples (history/current events) to aid memory of government functions.
Course material is updated regularly to reflect current events (e.g., 2012 elections reference).
On exams, focus on structural questions (how many senators, term lengths, House size) rather than policy details or partisan actions.
Example questions you’ll be asked: number of Senators, term lengths, why the House has 435 members since 1929. These are about government structure, not party platforms.
Core functions of all governments (regardless of regime)
Four basic functions common to all governments:
Make rules (legislation, law setting)
Enforce the rules (police, courts, penalties)
Adjudicate/interpret the rules (courts interpreting laws)
Provide security (protect citizens and state, national defense)
Security is the most important function; failure to provide security historically leads to collapse of states (e.g., Carthaginian and Roman empires).
Beyond basics, governments must communicate rules to the public; without communication, rules are ineffective.
Propaganda can be involved in communication, even in repressive regimes; regular communication to the public is a constant feature (e.g., White House press conferences).
Leadership cultivation: states continually cultivate leaders; age and experience matter (e.g., comment on the age of presidents like Trump).
Federalism: serves as a training ground for future leaders; local and state roles build capacity for national leadership; career paths often move from local to state to federal levels.
Public services and public goods: distinguish between services provided by government and those that markets can provide.
Public goods: items the market cannot effectively provide because they are non-excludable and non-rival in consumption (e.g., national security, clean air, public order).
Government provision of public goods legitimizes the state and provides legitimacy for rule.
Even autocratic regimes require some level of public goods and communication to maintain legitimacy; the state must offer goods/services to maintain power.
How governments implement priorities: coercion and compromise
All enforcement relies on threat of force (coercion) to ensure compliance with rules (e.g., penalties, imprisonment, loss of licenses).
But coercion alone is insufficient; a balance with compromise and citizen cooperation is required for durable governance.
The “shopping cart” analogy: people obey laws due to both fear of consequences and incentives (e.g., seat belt laws, speed limits).
Example: national speed limit policy introduced in the past via highway funds and slogans like “55 saves lives”; seat belt laws used to enforce compliance.
If a majority of people refuse to cooperate, the government’s power weakens; thus, governments must negotiate and adapt to citizen behavior.
Citizen tactics against government include lying, propaganda, lawsuits, protests, civil disobedience, and sometimes violence; governance requires managing these dynamics.
The balance between coercion and consent is essential for stable governance; policy must be acceptable to the public, not just legally enforceable.
Forms of government: types and key ideas
Autocracy: rule by one unelected official who is not accountable to the people (monarch, dictator, absolute ruler).
Oligarchy: rule by a small group not accountable to the people (e.g., military officers in some contexts historically).
Democracy: a system that permits significant citizen participation in governance; the size of participation varies.
Constitutional government: a government constrained and defined by a constitution; limits on authority are codified.
Authoritarian vs. totalitarian:
Authoritarian: some limits exist on authority, but rulers concentrate power and suppress dissent (e.g., some regimes where institutions exist but are weak).
Totalitarian: no meaningful limits on authority; pervasive control over politics, society, economy, and culture.
Dictatorships and one-party rule: examples include various regimes where power is centralized in a single party or leader.
Communism: a one-party socialist rule aimed at centralized planning and state ownership of the means of production; emphasizes collective ownership and absence of private property in the ultimate vision.
Fascism: a one-party, rigid dictatorship that uses force to maintain power; mobilizes masses around elite-defined goals; emphasizes nationalism and unity under a strong leader.
Nazism: a form of fascism with explicit racial policies; aggressive expansionism and anti-Semitic ideology; distinct in its racial crimes.
Theocracy: rule by divine authority or religious authority; relatively rare today.
Common thread: many regimes share core features (coercion, legitimacy, leadership cultivation) but differ on ideology, freedom, and extent of state power.
Democracy: historical perspective and modern form in the United States
Athens as the classical origin of democracy; origins and limitations:
Demos means “the people”; kratos means “rule.” Ancient Athens practiced direct democracy, where eligible citizens could participate directly in debates and policy-making.
Pericles around 450 BC: to limit participation due to increasing foreign-born residents, a law required both parents to be Athenian citizens for citizenship; participation fell to roughly 6,000–7,000 people, despite a city of tens of thousands.
Problems with direct democracy: slow policy development; populism; volatility of decisions; tyranny of the majority (majority can impose decisions that may harm minority rights).
Example: Milos case — Athens demanded neutrality; when Milos refused, Athens debated and decided to invade, leading to conquest and enslavement of the population; illustrates how majority action can be unjust.
Tocqueville’s insight (1835): democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government; it can exist only until the voters benefit from public treasury (limited by debt concerns and risk of political corruption).
The founders’ view and American constitutional arrangement:
The United States is not merely a democracy; it is a constitutional republic (representative democracy) with a constitution that limits what government can do.
The language distinction: democracy vs. republic; in America, citizens elect representatives to make policy within constitutional limits rather than directly governing every issue.
Tocqueville’s observations informed American political thought; his visit to America inspired analysis on how democracy can function without degenerating into unchecked populism.
The French Revolution and liberalism:
Classical liberalism emphasized individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and constitutional rule; liberal thought sought to reduce archaic impediments to economic liberty and political rights.
The French Revolution (late 18th century) demonstrated abuses and radicalism that can accompany rapid liberal reform when not checked by institutions and tradition; it led to violent excesses and suppression of opposition.
Edmund Burke’s conservatism: critique of rapid reform; emphasis on tradition, gradual change, and recognition that reason and science cannot fully capture moral and spiritual life; defense of religious authority as stabilizing force.
Representative democracy and the danger of theory without practice:
The debate between liberalism (advocating change) and conservatism (advocating continuity and order) shaped political debates for centuries.
Classical liberalism aimed to liberalize markets and promote constitutional democracies; criticisms included the risk that top-down reform can backfire if not grounded in social reality and tradition.
Burke’s insight: social order is built on prejudices, habit, and attachments; pure rational design cannot capture these realities.
Ideologies in political thought: definition and purpose
Ideologies are systems of political thinking that organize values and priorities for large groups:
An ideology is a coherent set of beliefs about justice and the plan to achieve an ideal society.
The term is tied to how people think about politics at scale; when many people share beliefs, it becomes an ideology.
Carl Popper’s falsifiability criterion: if a belief cannot be falsified or empirically challenged, it is not science but a belief system.
Ideologies are often treated as belief systems akin to religion; debates between opposing ideologies can be intractable because they rest on different foundational premises.
Early ideological contenders:
The earliest ideology (in power) was divine right: kings and chieftains claimed authority derived from God.
The Enlightenment and the Protestant Reformation challenged dogma and promoted reason, individual liberty, and skepticism of church-backed rule.
Feudalism: a system of land-based power where nobles owned land and peasants worked; impeded economic mobility and liberty; gradual liberal critique emerged to reduce impediments to economic transactions (capitalism).
Liberalism: classical vs contemporary
Classical liberalism: emphasis on individual liberty, free markets, limited government, constitutional rule, and the idea that rising wealth benefits all (the “rising tide lifts all boats”).
The liberal project faced challenges in practice when reform attempts were top-down or failed to account for social complexities during upheavals.
Contemporary liberalism: supports a stronger state to address inequalities created by capitalism; advocates for redistribution, regulation of private property and markets, and social protections to mitigate the effects of capitalism.
The cycle of reform and reaction:
As liberal reforms expand, conservative forces push back; historical debates include the balance between liberty and order, freedom and equality, and the proper size of government.
The modern political landscape often features a split between classical liberal principles (limited government, markets) and contemporary liberal aims (regulation, redistribution) within a constitutional framework.
The warning from Jefferson:
Quote: “A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.” This underlines concerns about the growth of state power and potential abuses of expansionary governance.
Classical liberalism, conservatism, and the critique of social reform
Classical liberalism (18th–19th centuries):
Promoted individual liberty, free markets, and limited government.
Advocated for constitutional democracies and education in social science to understand human behavior and design better institutions.
Critique: attempts to reform from the top down can fail; social order grows from bottom up and through gradual evolution, not abrupt radical change.
Conservatism (as a corrective force):
Emphasizes tradition, social continuity, and recognition that reason alone cannot resolve all moral and social questions.
Values religious authority and social cohesion as stabilizing forces; warns against destabilizing upheaval and rapid, radical reordering of society.
Edmund Burke as a leading conservative voice: humans possess prejudices, emotions, habits, and attachments that shape political life; these cannot be fully managed by abstract reason.
The critique of rationalist social reform:
The belief that science and pure reason can redesign society ignores complexities of human nature and cultural heritage.
Revolutionary experiments (e.g., French Revolution) illustrate the risk of overthrowing long-standing social orders without building durable institutions.
Marxism and the critique of capitalism (founders of modern socialist thought):
Karl Marx argued that economic relations determine social structures; class relations arise from ownership of the means of production.
Marx’s core claims: capitalism leads to class conflict between bourgeoisie (owners of production) and proletariat (laborers); a centralized state will own the means of production and orchestrate a planned economy; universal labor obligation; centralization of credit, transportation, and production; abolition of private property as a means to achieve social equality.
The predicted outcome: collapse of capitalism and a transition to a communist utopia with no need for government.
Key problem: Marx’s theory presumes a peaceful transition; actual history showed that centralized power leads to coercive states and abuses; “utopia” tends to become authoritarian, not abolished government.
Leninism vs. Mensheviks:
Mensheviks: favored reform within existing institutions and gradual change.
Bolsheviks: rejected gradualism; advocated seizure of power and revolutionary transformation; central planning and a vanguard party to guide the revolution.
The real-world trajectory of communism and socialism:
State ownership, central planning, and the suppression of private property in Marxist theory did not yield universal prosperity; rather, they concentrated power and led to abuses of power (Gulag references in literature and accounts of repression).
Utopian promises collided with human incentives and power dynamics; the idea that the state would wither away after achieving utopia proved historically untenable in many cases.
Fascism and Nazism as contemporary anti-liberal movements:
Both rejected liberalism and democracy; sought to mobilize masses around elite-defined goals with strong leadership.
Common features: strong state, nationalist rhetoric, and rejection of liberal individual rights in favor of collective solidarity and state power.
Differences:
Fascism (Italy): authoritarian but allowed private property and some economic freedom to maintain support; used religious and social structures to stabilize power; constrained power by other institutions (e.g., the pope historically in Italy).
Nazism (Germany): totalitarian and racially exclusive; pursued radical racial policies and expansionism; used terror and mass violence to achieve aims; violently suppressed opposition, including targeting communists after the Reichstag fire.
The attraction of these ideologies in times of economic and social distress shows how regimes can gain power by offering security, order, and national purpose while limiting rights and suppressing dissent.
Contemporary liberalism vs classical liberalism (revisited):
Contemporary liberals advocate a strong state to mitigate capitalism’s inequalities and to regulate markets, redistribute wealth through progressive taxation, and safeguard social welfare.
Classical liberals emphasize small government, individual rights, and free markets; worry about the capacity of a big state to erode civil liberties.
Summary takeaway on ideologies:
Ideologies are powerful frameworks for interpreting political life, but they may justify coercive power or justify sacrificing liberty for perceived social goods. Historical experience shows that both too little and too much state power can produce harmful outcomes; balance, checks, and accountability matter.
Real-world implications and reflections
The state’s legitimacy hinges on its ability to provide security and public goods while respecting rights and political processes.
The role of memory and context in politics: public memory is short; leaders must continually persuade and present forward-looking plans to maintain public support.
The relationship between economic systems and political order:
Capitalism creates winners and losers; inequality can prompt calls for reform and greater government intervention.
A modern debate centers on how large the state should be and how to balance efficiency, innovation, and social protection.
Important caveats and clarifications:
Politics is the allocation of values and priorities; elections are a key expression of political choice, but the rules under which elections occur (constitutions, institutions) shape outcomes.
The study of government, ideology, and political processes requires distinguishing between descriptive observations (how things work) and normative judgments (how things should be).
Closing thought to carry into the next session:
The difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic is not just terminology; it reflects how power is distributed, constrained, and legitimized by institutions and constitutions. The conversation about the size and scope of government continues across eras, influenced by economic conditions, social pressures, and historical experience.
Quick reference: Key terms, figures, and numbers
Public goods: goods that markets cannot efficiently provide; examples include
Monopoly on the use of violence: the government holds a legal right to compel or sanction individuals via coercive power.
House size: members (since 1929 adjustments)
Senate size: members (two per state)
Population reference: (approximately 330 million people in the U.S.)
National debt quote used in class: approximately
Speed limit policy example: target nationwide limit of ; slogans like “55 saves lives” illustrate policy communication strategies
Notable quotes:
Tocqueville on democracy: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters the benefits from the public treasury."
Jefferson on government size: "A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have."
Core ideologies discussed:
Classical liberalism: limited government, free markets, constitutional rule
Contemporary liberalism: stronger state to address capitalism’s inequalities
Conservatism: tradition, gradual change, religious authority, social order
Marxism/Communism: state ownership of means of production, central planning, class-based analysis
Leninism vs. Mensheviks: revolutionary seizure vs. reform within existing systems
Fascism and Nazism: authoritarian or totalitarian regimes with elite-defined goals; suppression of opposition; nationalism
Theocracy: rule by divine authority