1 / 30

POLS 550 Comparative Politics

POLS 550 Comparative Politics. Discussion of Chapters 2-4, Transitions to Democracy. POLS 550 Comparative Politics. General impressions of the article Did you like it? Why or why not? Do you think it provides a useful framework of analysis?

hubert
Télécharger la présentation

POLS 550 Comparative Politics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Discussion of Chapters 2-4, Transitions to Democracy

  2. POLS 550 Comparative Politics General impressions of the article • Did you like it? Why or why not? • Do you think it provides a useful framework of analysis? • If so, how? How would you classify the argument from a theoretical perspective?

  3. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Some more specific questions: • What does Rustow mean in his discussion of genetic versus functional theories of democracy? • What is the distinction between the two, and what is his focus? • Why does he talk about these two types of arguments in the first place?

  4. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Basic point: Rustow argues that “single world-wide explanations of democracy” aren’t helpful, and may not even be possible. In his critique of Lipset’s well-known article that examines statistical correlations on democracy, Rustow states that Lipset’s “article well illustrates the difficulty of applying the functional perspective to the genetic question. Strictly interpreted, his data bear only on function.”

  5. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • From this and from his more general review of the literature, Rustow concludes that there is a need for a separate “genetic theory” of democracy, by which he means a theory that focuses on the genesis or the origins of democracy.

  6. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Once we make the move, however, we need to be aware of a number of methodological points. He starts us off with seven (pp. 21-22) …

  7. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • The factors that keep a democracy stable may not be the ones that brought it into existence: explanations of democracy must distinguish between function and genesis. • Correlation is not the same a causation: a genetic theory must concentrate on the latter. • Not all causal links run from social and economic to political factors. • Not all causal links run from beliefs and attitudes to actions. • The genesis of democracy need not be geographically uniform: there may be many roads to democracy. • The genesis of democracy need not be temporally uniform: different factors may become crucial during successive phases. • The genesis of democracy need not be socially uniform: even in the same place and time the attitudes that promote it may not be the same for politicians and for common citizens.

  8. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Rustow, in listing seven issues, understand very well that he is making the study of democratic transition and potentially very messy process. As he puts it, “Each proposition pleads for the lifting of some conventional restriction, for the dropping of some simplifying assumption made in the previous literature, for the introduction of complicating, diversifying factors.” But, as he also states, “It ain’t necessarily so.”

  9. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • This is because the genetic perspective requires or makes possible a number of new restrictions. He lists three: • Empirical data in support of a genetic theory must cover, for any given country, a time period from just before until just after the advent of democracy. • To examine the logic of transformation within political systems, we may leave aside countries where a major impetus came from abroad. • A model or ideal type of the transition may be derived from a close examination of two or three empirical cases and tested by application to the rest.

  10. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Empirical data in support of a genetic theory must cover, for any given country, a time period from just before until just after the advent of democracy.

  11. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • As Rustow explains it, “That diachronic data, covering more than a single point in time, are essential to any genetic theory should be obvious. Such a theory, moreover, must be based on cases where the process is substantially complete.” Rustow is telling two things here:

  12. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • First (in reverse order), he’s telling us that for the purposes of theorizing on the genesis of democracy, we have to look at cases where the genesis has actually been completed; that is, we need to look at countries that have successfully made the transition. • Second, he’s telling us that we have to use historical data (diachronic simply means historical). As he puts it, “The study of democratic transitions will take the political scientist deeper into history than he has commonly been willing to go. This implies many changes in method, beginning with suitable substitutions for survey data and for interviews.”

  13. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • To examine the logic of transformation within political systems, we may leave aside countries where a major impetus came from abroad.

  14. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • His basic logic here is that there has always been a convenient division of labor between the subfields of comparative politics and international relations, and that we should leave the study of the influence of international factors to IR scholars. • He also suggests that the dynamics of democratic transition when strongly influenced by external factors are likely to be different from the dynamics of democratic transition when “internally generated,” and, for this reason, it makes sense for a theory of democratic origin discount countries where external influences played an obvious role.

  15. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • A model or ideal type of the transition may be derived from a close examination of two or three empirical cases and tested by application to the rest.

  16. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Here, Rustow is basically making an argument for carrying out case studies as opposed to broad-based quantitative analysis. This is a pretty standard argument. • As he puts it, “the more nearly complete the coverage, the shallower it will have to be. The number of possible variables is so enormous (economic conditions, social cleavages, political alignments, psychological attitudes) that they could be handled only be means of the kind of simplifying assumptions that we rejected earlier on logical grounds….The country monograph [i.e., a case study] would avoid this danger. “

  17. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • With these methodological issues in mind, Rustow then proceeds to introduce his argument, which he conveniently breaks into four parts: • Background conditions • Preparatory phase • Decision phase • Habituation phase

  18. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Background conditions • Rustow reduces the “background conditions” necessary to democratic transition to a single condition: national unity, by which he means that the “vast majority of citizens in a democracy-to-be must have no doubt or mental reservations as to which political community they belong to. • As a “background condition” Rustow means that national unity must precede all other phases of democratization; except for this, though, timing is irrelevant. That is, doesn’t matter when it was achieved, in premodern times or very recently. Nor does it matter by what means it was achieved.

  19. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Background conditions • Key Implication: To single out national unity as the sole background condition implies no minimal level of economic development or social differentiation is necessary as a prerequisite to democracy.

  20. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Preparatory phase • By itself, national unity will not necessarily lead to democratization. A “trigger” for democratization is needed. To Rustow, this trigger is …? • a prolonged and inconclusive political struggle.

  21. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Preparatory phase • Why does the struggle have to be prolonged and inconclusive? • The answer: Basically, because these two conditions create the incentive for entrenched forces to compromise.

  22. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Preparatory phase • Key Implications: Counter-intuitively, Rustow argues that democracy is often the product of intense polarization, rather than pluralism. He also suggests, à laSamuel Huntington, that it perfectly feasible there to be “democracy with democrats”

  23. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Preparatory phase • Key Implications: Lastly, Rustow suggests that the nature of the struggle will likely play out very differently in different places at different times. As he puts it, “No two existing democracies have gone through a struggle between the very same forces over the same issues and with the same institutional outcome. Hence, it seems unlikely that any future democracy will follow in the same footsteps of any of its predecessors.”

  24. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Decision phase • Countries don’t become democracies through “absentmindedness.” Instead, as Rustow puts it, “what concludes the preparatory phase is a deliberate decision on the part of political leaders to accept the existence of diversity in unity and, to that end, to institutionalize some crucial aspect of democratic procedure.”

  25. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Decision phase • Countries don’t become democracies through “absentmindedness.” Instead, as Rustow puts it, “what concludes the preparatory phase is a deliberate decision on the part of political leaders to accept the existence of diversity in unity and, to that end, to institutionalize some crucial aspect of democratic procedure.” • This can happen in one fell swoop, or it can happen in a piecemeal fashion.

  26. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Decision phase • Key points. Decision means choice (or agency). Democracy never flows automatically from the first two phases. • Rustow also states that while the decision phase may well be considered an act of deliberate, explicit consensus, the decision itself flows from conflict and disagreement.

  27. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Habituation phase • This phase can be summed up very easily: “A distasteful decision, once made, is likely to seem more palatable as one is forced to live with it.”

  28. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Summing up: • “The model here presented makes three broad assertions. First, it says that certain ingredients are indispensable to the genesis of democracy. For one thing, there must be a sense of national unity. For another, there must be entrenched and serious conflict. For a third, there must be a conscious adoption of democratic rules. And, finally, both politicians and electorate must be habituated to these rules.”

  29. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Summing up: • Secondly, the model asserts that these ingredients must be assembled one at a time. Each task has its own logic and each has its natural protagonists…. The model thus abandons the quest for ‘functional requisites’ of democracy; for such a quest heaps all tasks together and thus makes the total job of democratization quite unmanageable.

  30. POLS 550 Comparative Politics Rustow: Transitions to Democracy • Summing up: • The model explicitly rejects what are sometimes known as preconditions of democracy. It also rejects that “consensus on fundamentals” is necessary for democratic transition. The basis of democracy, in fact, is not maximum consensus, but rather a tenuous middle ground between imposed uniformity (such as would lead to some sort of tyranny) and implacable hostility (of a kind that would disrupt the community in civil war or secession). A Rustow puts it, “A people who were not in conflict about some rather fundamental matters would have little need to devise democracy’s elaborate rules for conflict resolution.”

More Related