What Is Comparative Politics?: Theory of Comparative Political Systems

Theory of comparative political systems
Introduction:
Comparative politics is a main field in political science.
A large part of the story of Comparative politics has been, and continues
to be written by those who work and trained within the walls of U.S.
Academia. Comparative politics emerged as a distinct field of political
science in the United States in late 19th century. Courses on foreign
governments were offered in a few American Universities as early as
1890s.
Comparative politics defined
What is comparative Politics?
 Comparative politics is a very rich and dynamic field because its

range of inquiry in the world's political systems.
 Comparative politics involves the systematic study and comparison
of the world's political systems.
 It seeks to explain differences and similarities among countries.
 It looks for trends and it tries to develop general propositions and
hypotheses that describe and explain the trends.
Sophomore students Arabic section

1
 The field of comparative politics has no one single focus. It includes

several different kinds of studies:
1- Studies of one country, or particular institution:
 (Political party, political process, decision making or public policy,

lobar or welfare policy) in that country.
 Those single–country studies are probably the easiest for young
students.
2- Studies for two or more countries:
This kind is often difficult for the beginning students.
3- Regional or area studies:
 These may include studies of Africa, Latin America, the Middle

East, East and South Asia, Europe or other Sub regions.
 These studies are useful because they involve groups of counters
that may have the same characteristics.
4- Studies across regions:
 Such studies can be more interesting but they are often difficult
and expensive to carry out.
 Such studies might in value, as an example- comparison of the role
of the military in Africa and Middle East.

2
5- Global comparative studies:
 With the improved statistical data collected by the World Bank

and other agencies, it is now possible to do comparisons on a
global basis.
6- Thematic Studies:
 Comparative politics focuses on as well as countries and regimes

rate of the state. Dependency, democracy, democratization,
professionalization of Military.
 Such studies are often complex, difficult at the theoretical level
and also carried out by more senior scholars.
 From the survey of the types of research or studies in comparative

politics, several interesting lessons emerge:
- One should recognize degrees of difficulty. For the beginning

students, a single country study or two country comparison may
be appropriate.
- Such diversity is healthy and stimulating because there are

varieties of` approaches and perspective can be used.

3
Comparative politics past and present
 Comparative politics has a long history. The foremost political

thinkers have rather been student of comparative politics.
 Courses on "Foreign Governments" were offered in a few
American universities as early as 1890s. The courses concentrated
almost exclusively on the European countries Britain & France.
 Comparative politics emerged as a separate field within the
political science discipline after the World War I. At that time it
called " comparative government"
 The focus of comparative government in the period between World

Wars I and II it was on the formal legal aspects of government.
 Political scientist in this period mainly studied the formal
structures and constitutions of the countries which were concerned.
 World War II had a profound effect on comparative politics in a

number of ways:
- It introduced the phenomenon of totalitarianism as practiced in

Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy and in Stalin's Soviet Union.
- It expanded the interest of comparative politics to other countries

like china, Japan, India and others.

4
- The period after World War II witnessed several major

developments in comparative politics, it began to be influenced
by the shift in American Political Science Toward the study of
political behavior and informal political processes such as interest
groups, political parties or decision making.
 So the field of comparative politics came to the known no longer

comparative government but now comparative politics.
The Development of the Methods in Comparative

Politics 1880-1920:
1- In 1880, the first Political Science Department was built in

Columbia University's School of Political Science.
2- In 1903, the founding of the discipline's professional association,

The American Political Science Association (APSA).
3- Political science began to be independent of philosophy, law,

history and sociology.
- During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the

traditional study of comparative politics in the American
universities was established and reflected a significant concern
for both historical perspective and norms of political behavior.

5
- The traditional era produced a host of studies that carefully

described political structures and institutions. There are six
major characteristics that marked the traditional era:
1. Configurative description. 2. Formal legalism.
3. Parochialism. 4. Conservatism.
5. Non theoretical emphases. 6. Methodological insensitivity.
These characteristics have strongly marked the study of politics in

past and continue today in varying form.
1) configurative description:
Most studies of comparative politics concentrated on descriptive
discourse. Attention was focused on detailed description of the
political system (governments, institutions) there was no real
comparison.
2) formal legalism:
There was preoccupation with formal structures and legal

institutions, the studies concentrated exclusively on constitutions,
cabinet, parliaments, courts, and bureaucracies.
3) Parochialism:
The scope of comparison was limited to western political systems.

And the scope of studies was narrowed again and again to the same
four societies (Britain, France, Germany and Russia). Most

6
discussion of Africa, Asia and Middle East governments was left

to archeologists, orientalists, or diplomats.
4) conservatism:
The focus of analysis as well as its aim was to establish the issue of
stability and preservation of political systems (conservation). So
Attention was given to stability not to change or transformation.
Because most of the scholars assumed that all political systems
were inevitability evolving in the direction of democracy, and no
one can touch what is fundamental.
5) Non theoretical emphases:

No one was interested in building empirical theory or reaching
generalizations .the traditional issues presented by thinkers such as
Machiavelli, Hobbes, Montesquieu; they were not concerned with
operationalizing, concepts, and building scientific theory.
6) Methodological insensitivity:
The traditional issues presented by thinkers were limited in the

methodological and research procedures .techniques of gathering;
testing and classifying materials were very backwards because the
descriptive and formal legal study of institutions didn’t demand
deep scientific research.
This stage witnessed the emergence of two paradigms in political

science including comparative politics.

7
Rationalist Idealism:
 It was interested in studying rational institutions, constitutional

structure and political organization in an independent way outside
the history, philosophy, economy, sociology, and public law.
 This school assumed various assumptions:
- Absolute believe in the spread of democratic institutions.
- Complete harmony of interest of all people.
- Rationality as the basis of human behavior.
Material Positivism:
 This school was linked to the experience of World War I. When

political development led to reversal in the thinking of ideal
school, democracy didn't spread, on the contrary dictatorship and
fascism became common.
 With the shadow of the two paradigms, three theoretical
approaches appeared in the field of comparative politics:
1. Legal analysis.
2. Institutional analysis.
3. Abstract political analysis emphasized the absolute necessity of

spreading democracy.

8
Behaviorism:
 Behaviorism can be defined as the systematic search for political

patterns through the formulation of empirical theory, the technical
analysis and verification.
 Behaviorism involves two basic elements: the formulation of
(concepts, hypotheses and explanations in systematic terms), and
empirical methods of research.
 Behaviorists reacted against a definition of the field that restricted

its scope to the formal institutions of government and thought to
include a range of informal procedures and behaviors-related to
interest groups, mass communication, political culture and political
socialization. That was seen as key to the functioning of the
political system.
- And the second key idea was the need for a scientific approach to
theory and methods.
 Behaviorists were opposed to what they saw as vague, rarified

theory. They argued for systematic theory and empirical testing
and they sought to bring major changes in comparative politics,
and their impact on the field would be high.

9
 The essence of behavioral science is that all hypotheses can be

experimentally confirmed by reference to publically observable
changes in behavior.
 Behaviorism’s broadening of the field's scope beyond the
government and its formal institutions opened comparative politics
to a range of theoretical influences from other disciplines
(sociology, anthropology and psychology).
 The behavioral movement within the discipline of political science
has involved the following characteristics:
1- Regularities in political behavior that can be tested and stated.

2- Measurement and quantification: the political behavior can be
measured through techniques involving selection, collection
and ordering of data can be facilitated by quantification.
3- Systemization: Means relations between empirical research and
theory building.
4- Values: Behaviorism doesn't discard values but rather stresses
the need to distinguish between values and facts
5- Pure science: means the logical prescience of theory in the
analysis explanation to the political activities of political
engineering
6- Integration: behaviorism often calls for utilization of cross
disciplinary approaches and findings.

10
 During this period, The major debate or dialogue has been

between …
- Those seeking to confine (determine) the meaning of behaviorism
to the employment of quantitative techniques and measurement.
- And those identifying behaviorism more with the scientific
methodology of hypothesis formulation and theory building.
 The behavioral approach has been challenged fundamentally by
the post behavioral revolution which concentrated on the role of
values and importance of policy consideration.
The Post Behavioral Revolution:
 The behaviorism came to an end in the mid-1960s or, more

precisely, in 1966.
 During this period, quantitative research was not the center of the
agenda of comparative politics and researchers followed by
different paths.
 Largely due to the lack of data on many undemocratic countries,
compartivist produced and discussed a series of methodological
texts about case studies and small number comparisons.
 In 1989, a new phase in the evolution of comparative politics

began with a push to make the field more scientific. This period
(1989- ) is best characterized as a period of pluralism, so

11
comparative politics during this period has many trends that tried
to direct comparative politics that may be summarized as follows:
1) Interdisciplinary cooperation and communication between
scientific fields by borrowing progress from different social
and natural sciences (biology, human behavior).
2) Inter-societal cooperation and understanding: A call was raised
to bypass western frameworks and focus on other cultures and
societies.
3) Asserting the concepts of state: Post behaviorism reconsider the
state.
4) Inter-procedural experimentation and adaptation: the concern

of the experimental, statistical, and mathematical techniques
were emphasized and developed during the post-behavioral era.

12
Main concepts in
Comparative politics
POLITICS:
 Politics is the authoritative allocation of values.

 Politics is the activity by which groups reach binding collective
decisions through attempting to reconcile differences among their
members. There are four points embedded in the definition:
- It is a collective activity involving people who accept a common

membership or at least acknowledged a shared fate.
- Politics presume an initial diversity of views, if not about goals

then at least about means, if we were all agree all the time
politics would not be necessary.
- Politics involving reconciling such differences through

discussions and persuasion.
- Political decisions become authoritative policy for a group

members might be implemented by force if necessary.

13
Political System:
 Political system is a set of institutions concerned with formulating

and implementing the collective goals of a society or groups
within it.
 The decisions of the political system are normally backed up by
legitimate coercion and obedience may be compelled.
 By legitimacy means that who are believe in the right (whether by
law or by custom) of the ruler to rule in sense of implementing
their decisions by force if necessary.
 Political system exists in both a domestic and an international
environment molding these environments and being molded by
them.
 The system receives inputs from these environments and attempts

to shape them through its outputs.
 Within political system the familiar political institutions and
agencies are interest groups, political parties, legislature,
executives and bureaucracies and courts.
 These institutions are organized differently and function in
dramatically different ways.

14
Political System and Its Functions
System Functions Process Functions Policy Functions
Socialization. Interest articulation. Extracting.
Recruitment. Interest aggregation. Regulation.
Communication. Policy making. Distribution.
Policy implementation
and adjudication.
System Functions:
 Socialization, recruitment and communications are not directly

involved in making and implementing public policy but are of
fundamental importance to the political system.
 Political socialization: involves (family, schools, churches,
communication media and various political structures) that
develop reinforce and transform political attitudes of political
system.
 Political recruitment: refers to the selection of people for political
activity or governmental offices.

15
 Political communication: refers to the flow of information through

the society and through the various structures that make up the
political system. These three functions are the system functions
because they determine the system will be maintained or changed.
Process functions: How does the political system work?
 Individuals and groups in the political system must decide what

they want and hope to get from politics?
1) The political process begins as these interests are expressed or

articulated (interest articulation) to be effective. These demands
must be combined into policy alternatives for which substantial
support must be mobilized (interest aggregation and policy
making).
2) The implementation of each policy may affect several different

aspects of a society. These process functions are performed by
political structures like political parties, legislatures, political
executives, bureaucracies and courts.
3) The adjudication policy must be enforced and implemented and

if it is challenged and violated, there must be some process of
adjudication.

16
Policy Functions:
 Policy functions treats the outputs (the implementation of

political process). These functions include the various:
1- Forms of regulation behavior.
2- Extractions of resources in the form of Texas and distributions

of benefits and services to various groups of population.
- The outcomes of these political activities in a cyclical fashion

result in new inputs, in new demands for legislation of
administrative action and in increase or decrease in the amount
of support given to the political system.
 These functions describe the activities carried on in any society
regardless of how its political system is organized, or what kinds of
policies it produces.
*********************************************

17
 The main reasons for comparison:
The activity of making comparisons centers on four main

objectives, all of which are coexisting and are mutually reinforcing
in any systematic comparative study .but some of which receive
more emphasis, depending on the aspiration of the scholar.
1) Contextual description:
 The first objective of comparative politics is the process of
descripting the political phenomena and events of a particular
country or group of countries.
 The goal of contextual description more knowledge about the
nation studied more knowledge about one’s own political system,
or both.
 The comparative literature is replete with examples of this kind
of research and it is always cited to represent "old" comparative
politics as opposed to the "new" comparative politics which has
aspiration beyond more description but the point is all
comparative studies begins with good description for the
following reasons :
- Description serves as important component of research process.
- Description ought to precede the other three objectives of the
comparison.

18
- Purely descriptive studies serves as the raw data for those

comparative studies that aspire to higher level of explanation.
2) Classification:
 It is a necessary component of systematic study In order to group
vast numbers of countries, political systems and events into
distinct categories with shared characteristics.
 Classification can be a simple dichotomy such as between
authoritarian and democracy. Or it can be more complex typology
of regimes and governmental systems.
 Like contextual description is a necessary component of

systematic comparison but it represents a higher level of
comparison for the following :
- classification seeks to group many separate descriptive entities
into simpler categories
- It reduces the complexity of the world by seeking out those
qualities that countries share and that they don’t share.
 The process of classification is not new. The most famous effort at

classification is found in Aristotle’s book “politics”. He
establishes six types of rule based on the combination of their
form (good- corrupt) and the number of those who rule (one-few-
many) Aristotle derived the following six forms:

19
One Few Many
Good Monarchy. Aristocracy. Polity.
Corrupt Tyranny. Oligarchy. Democracy.

(mob rule)
 German sociologist “max weber” provided an analysis of the

bases of legitimacy (the acceptance of people for the political
systems) weather people accept the political system or not. He
distinguished among three types of authority as following:
Type Basses Example
Traditional Custom and established Monarchy

legitimacy way of doing things.
Charismatic Intense commitment to Revolutionary

the leader.
Legal rational Rules and procedures. Bureaucracy

20
3) Hypothesis- testing:
 Testing hypothesis means searching for the empirical relationship.
 Hypothesis can be derived from certain theories in comparative
politics.
 Testing hypotheses means discover the relations among variables
empirically, for example “Powell” in 1982 examines a number of
key hypotheses concerning voter participation in twenty nine
democratic countries.
 He argues that voting participation ought to be higher in countries
with higher level of economic development, and the political
development doesn’t affect the voting participation directly but it
leads or helps a representative constitution’ electoral laws that
facilitate voting’ and a party system with strong alignment to
groups in society.
4) prediction :
 The final and most difficult objective of comparative politics. It is
a logical extension of the hypothesis testing.
 Prediction is based on generalization from initial comparison.
 Prediction in comparative politics tends to be made in
probabilistic terms such as countries with systems of proportional
representation are very likely to have multiple political parties.

21
 These four main objectives of compressions are shared between

natural science and political science because science is defined as a
gradual accumulation of knowledge about the empirical world
through systematic practices of inquiry.
 Although prediction is less an aspiration of scholars today than in

the past, there are those who continue to couch their argument in
predictive language, for example “Samuel P. Huntington”.
- He identifies 9 key cultural groupings and predicts future conflicts

will appear in the areas where two or more of these cultures clash.
His prediction became all the more relevant after September 11,
2001 which was seen as a product of clashes between western and
Islamic civilizations.
***********************************************

22
How comparison consider a science:

 Science is defined as a gradual accumulation of knowledge about
the empirical world through systematic practices of inquiry.
 What are the parallels between political science and natural
science? What are the main differences between the two?
- Both the natural and political science seek to make inferences

based on the empirical world they observe and both seek to
maximize the certainty of these inferences.
- Despite these general similarities between natural science and
political science, There remain two important differences:
a. Experimentation.
b. Generation of law.
 The role of experimentation:

 In natural science, the advances are related to experimentation. But
in political science and comparative politics is difficult to use
experimentation, even though some scholars tend to use
experiments in their research. (Those who work in game theory,
focus groups and citizen- juries).

23
 Comparative politics in particular cannot use experimentation for

both practical and ethics reasons “It is impossible to re-run the
elections in the same country with different electoral system to
observe the outcomes of the two systems”. Ethically it would be
impossible to redistribute income to see if civil strife erupts.
 Generation of law :
 The second difference involves the law-like status (The law of
conservation of energy-Newton’s law of motion). In political
Science, law like generalization is rare. Three famous laws of
political science are well known:
a) Michael’s iron low : oligarchy states that in organizations and

all groups develop a hierarchical structure of authority with a
small elite at their head.
b) Maurice Duverger’ law: states that Electoral systems based on
single member’s districts tend to produce two parties while
systems with proportional representation tend to produce
multiple parties.
c) The third law on the democratic peace: states that democracies
do not go to war with other democracies.

24
Terms and concepts:

It is necessary to define and clarify terms and concepts that have
been used in comparative politics.
 Theory: is a set of systematically related generalization suggesting

new observations for empirical testing.
- There are two basic types of theory in political science;
Normative theory specifies how things in society ought to be,
Empirical theory seeks to establish casual relationships between two
or more concepts to explain a political phenomenon.
 Method: is the way by which a theory is derived and tested.

 Ontology: is the study of being or the metaphysical concern with the
essence of things including the nature.
 Epistemology: is the study of the nature of knowledge. How scholars
came to know the world.
 Methodology: is the study of different methods or system of methods
in a given filed in inquiry.
 Approach: is a predisposition to adapt a particular conceptual
formwork to explore certain type’s hypothesis towards the
generalization of theory.
 Hypothesis: a generalization presented in tentative and conjectural
terms.

25
 Paradigm: world’s view which legitimate the scientific community's

consensus or what constitute scientific research.
 Cases: are those countries that feature in comparative politics.
 Units of analysis: on which are the objects the scholar collects data.
 Variables: are those concepts whose values change over a given set
of units such as (income, the membership of political party).
 Dependent variables: are those political outcomes that the scholars
is trying to explain
 Independent variables: is that which explains the dependent
variables (causal variable).
 Observation: are the values of the variable for each unit, which can
be numeric, verbal, or even visual. (strategy)
 Level of analysis: are divided between two levels:

- Micro or individual level: concentrates on individual activities such
as elite members of political party or government. It may also
concentrate on the local unites or states in any country. Micro
analysts believe that world is shaped by structure less- agents.
- Macro or system level: concentrates or focuses on groups, social
classes’ interactions of nation states, and structure of power. Macro
analysts believe that world is shaped by unstoppable processes of
agentless-structures.

26
 Quantitative and qualitative method:

- Quantitative analysis: seeks to show differences in number
between certain objects of analysis, and it answers the simple
question: how many of them are there?
- Qualitative analysis: seeks to show differences in kind, identify,
and understand the attributes, characteristics of the objects of
inquiry in comparative politics. There are three types:
- Macro Historical comparison.
- In depth interviews. - Participant observation.
The field of comparison politics is richly populated with studies

that use quantitative and qualitative method.
*******************************************

27
Comparing to learn, learning to compare:
 Comparative politics (C.P.) is the only field in political science that

is defined in terms of a particular method. So we have to devote
serious attention to the issue of comparison.
 Learning how to compare is an extremely useful and valuable skill.
It also requires a willingness to understand and evaluate
differences and similarities in an open minded manner.
 An important and clearly related aspect of open mindedness is

critical thinking. To be critical means to engage in a process of
careful, well considered and reflective evaluation.
 Critical thinking is concerned with reasons, intellectual honesty
,open mindedness, it is also involves a number of concrete
practices, the most important of which are:
 Following evidence where it leads.
 Considering all possibilities, relying on reason rather than
emotion, being precise considering a variety of viewpoints and
explanation.
 In general, we can say that comparative analysis is the ideal
framework for critical thinking in social sciences.

28
Strategies of comparison:
 There are different strategies for doing comparative analysis. The
question you ask and the goal you wish to achieve determine the
comparative framework you use. Mainly we have two strategies of
comparison:
 The most similar systems (MSS).
 The most different systems (MDS).
 The most similar systems design(MSS):

 It is based on finding two or more very similar social systems
(country). That shares the whole range of similarities but also
differ in at least a couple of important respects.
 The comparison can focus on finding a significant dissimilarity
between the two systems which can then put forward as the causal
factor or key dependent variables.
 Limitations of MSS design:
- With only a limit number of cases, there is no way to be sure that
your findings are valid.
- A comparison of only one or two cases can’t provide a strong basis
for making big claims or (arguments).
- Don’t claim that your findings from MSS comparison are strong
valid, unequivocal proof of your argument because it is important
to understand that it is difficult to find two or more countries alike.

29
But they may be more similar or most similar and the closer we
look, the more differences we are likely to find.
- The MSS design suffers from flaw, and it is useful in giving added
importance for some variables over others but it can’t eliminate the
other possible causes (the difference in gun ownership between
Canada and USA).
 The importance of differences in the MSS design:
 The using of MSS design differences are more important than
similarities, we have to look for differences in dependent and
independent variables.
 You have to remember that if a pair of identical twins was truly
identical then a comparison of the two would make no (scientific)
sense.
 The most different systems design(MDS):
 The logic of the most different design is largely the reverse of the
MSS design. The main approach is to find two systems that are
different in almost every aspect except for the variable (x) under
investigation.
 The basic target is to find the key similarities on the dependent
variable.
 Many comparativists automatically assume that very dissimilar
systems can and should not be compared. There is a great debate

30
about that, but in general, we can say that an MDS design provide
a useful way of approaching some complex issues.
 In the study of Theda Skocpol entitled “states and social
revolutions”, She compared France, Russia and China, she applied
the basic principles of MDS design. She recognizes that the three
countries are different in many ways. The key reason for
comparing France, Russia, and China, derived from the profound
similarities each shared with regard to the dependent variable.
 Limitations in MDS:
- Like the MSS design. The MDS design is far from perfect. There is
no guarantee that the findings of MDS will confidently identify
causal relationships.
- MDS design can’t adequately deal with multiple causations, in
other words there is no reason to say the certain phenomena is not
a product of only one reason.
- Very different causes may produce the same result.
 Scholars must be caution, care, and constraint.
Concrete strategies of (C.P.):

There are several strategies open to researchers. These include, but
are not limited to:
1) The case study in comparative perspective.
2) A comparison of two units (binary analysis).

31
3) A multiunit comparison evolving three or more units.

4) A mixed design.
 The case study in comparative perspective:

 In comparative politics a case study is typically associated with in
depth examination of a specific case. Comparativist must put in his
mind that cases can exist at any level of analysis from the very
large (whole countries) to the very small (sub national unite), for
example, cities.
 A good comparativist may want to examine (smaller) cases.
 When using “countries” as cases, comparativists rarely seek to
learn more about this country, but researchers are almost always
interested in linking, the study of a country’s unique circumstances
with a particular political social or economic phenomenon.
 A case study analysis must base on:

 It includes in-depth analysis specific issue or concern (terrorism,
industrialization, revolution).
 A delimited geographic space (Japan, Egypt…).
 A certain period of time.

32
Can a certain case study even be comparative? There is a great debate

about that. But in general we can ask how to use case study in
comparative analysis?:
1- The first general rule of doing a case study in comparative to see

your case in relation to others, this requires you to be familiar with
both similar and dissimilar even if you don’t systematically
incorporate these other cases in your analysis.
2- The second rule for doing a case study in comparative perspective

is that a case study in comparative perspective aims at
generalization and that requires the researchable constantly
focused on examining her case in light of larger theoretical or
conceptual concerns.
The two general rules provide a very simple, put important
foundation for carrying out a case study in comparative politics or
really almost any type of comparative analysis.
3- The third rule for doing a “good” case study in comparative

perspective is quiet basic think comparatively but deeply and
systematically. The case must be original and representative, so it
must be compared to other cases.

33
 The advantages and pitfalls of comparative case study:

1) Limiting an analysis to a single country or unite has the
advantages of allowing the researcher to study a subject in great
depth and detail, this allows the researcher to achieve a degree of
understanding of a case that can’t be matched by other
comparative strategies.
2) Depth of understanding may come at the expense of explanation;
sometimes it is difficult to put generalization about dependent
variable (Social revolution).
3) Despite its undeniable limitations, the single case study will likely
always remain an important and legitimate but you must not
choose this strategy only because it appears easier, more
convenient, or more manageable.
 Comparing two cases (two-unite or binary comparison):

 This strategy is exactly the same logic as that of the MSS or MDS
design, the rules that apply to the single-unite case apply equally to
the binary comparison.
 The relation of cases is an extremely important consideration; it
should not be done in arbitrary manner.
 The cases must be selected carefully. The researcher must avoid
selection bias in which the researcher chasses cases that are most

34
likely to support or validate the argument he is trying to test, and

this is a serious methodological problem.
 These are some tactics the researcher can use to select cases in
binary comparison in this regard we can refer to the following:
- You must recognize and do your best to avoid over determination.
- Choosing hard cases is also very good practice.
- Select cases based on the dependent variable which is clearly
demonstrated (social revolution, economic development …)
- Case selection is governed not by methodological tactics alone but
also by theory, and they also guide our selection of cases.
 The within-case comparison is a special type of binary analysis as

the researcher will often divide the study into at least two separate
time periods, each time period can consider a separate case.
 Comparing three or more cases:

 When comparison is extended to three, four, five, or even a dozen
cases, the prospect for theory building improve as the number of
cases increases, the level of abstraction and generality increases.
 In spite of that there are limitations on this strategy, because of the
following:

35
- With the increase of the number of cases, the analysis becomes

unmanageable especially for the individual researcher.
- With comparing two or three or more cases, the researcher can use
statistical and quantitative analysis.
- There is no ideal number to compose in this strategy, it depends on
the situation but most researches depend on number from three to
five cases.
- With more cases, the problem of selection bias is reduced and the
researcher has to select careful case based on the logic of
comparative analysis.
 The mixed design:

 In practice, comparativists frequently use mixed design, and, in
general, it is a very useful approach to take.
 Mixed design helps to avoid the limitations of using only a single
comparative strategy.
 Mixed design may that be a perfect solution but it should be used
whenever possible.
 This strategy requires for thought, planning and a lot of research.
 Comparative analysis is the only strategy open to comparativists,
and it is also imperfect strategy with many limitations and flaws.
Researchers must be careful in their research design and the
conclusions they drive from their research.

36
Thinking theoretically in (C.P):

 Theory plays an absolutely essential role, unfortunately this role is
not clear in comparative politics, because there is no single or
dominant theoretical approach Distinguish the field.
Why study theory?
 There is no way to explain or understand the world without theory.
 Theory is part –and- parcel of understanding and/or explaining the
world in which we live.
How we all theorize?
 We all use theory all the time.
 It is not optional. Theory is some kind of simplicity device that
allows us to see which facts matter and which do not working with.
 Theories is like looking through different pairs of sunglasses ,
different types of “lenses” provide different ways to see “reality”
 Different lenses allow us to focus on different aspect of the same
larger reality.
 For example, if we want to ask about the main reasons of global
poverty.
 There are different responses highlight this fact, by choosing to

highlight some facts and ignoring others, you are unavoidably
engaged in a theoretical process, and different theories allow us to
focus on different aspects of the same larger reality.

37
Good and bad theory

What is the difference between good theorizing and bad theorizing?
 Good theorizing:
 Become much more aware and self-critical of how you think about
the world.
 Think carefully about what informs your views.
 Don’t presume that your views are correct, and assume that you
always have something new to learn.
 Listen carefully to what others have to say.
 Try to identify the weakness in the competing view
 Good theorizing, however, requires more than critical thinking.
You need to develop a clear understanding of the principals of
good theory.
 Bad theorizing:
 Theorize in an extremely superficial or arbitrary manner.
 Ignore or dismiss all facts that don't fit our understanding about the
world.
 Don't see the logical contradiction to our think.
 Confuse correlations with causation.
 Never think about the assumptions that our views based upon, or
regard our theory is self-evidently true without empirical evidence.

38
 What is theory?
 Theory is a simplified representation of reality.
 It is a framework within which facts are not only selected but also
interpreted, organized, and fitted together, so that they create a
coherent whole theory in comparative.
 There is diversity in theoretical approaches in comparative politics.
But no one has dominated the field but we can say that the field
has dominated by three traditions based on the principals of :
 Rationality.
 Structural tradition.
 Cultural tradition.
 Rational tradition:
 Comparativists and other political scientist who use rationality as a
basis for their research believe that politics should focus on the
behavior of the human beings themselves. So the key unite of
analysis is the individual.
 The main assumption of the rational theory:
- People are rational maximizes of self-interests and choose better
alternatives over worse ones.
- When individuals make decisions, engage in a cost benefit
calculation (strategic calculations)

39
- The main step of using rational choice approach is beginning with

the assumption that individuals generally pursue their self-interests
then coming up with a range of testable hypotheses which can be
used to help explain and predict specific outcomes.
- Self-interest itself is manifested through strategic calculation
process where they weigh the costs and benefits of their decisions.
- In the real world, strategic calculation is a part of interactive

interdependent process and it involves at least two players
(strategic interaction).
- The concept self-interest is ambiguous, as self-interest will vary
depending on environment in which decisions are being made.
- Environment helps to shape the actions of individual actors, and
you need to state in advance what motivates peoples’ decisions and
actions in a particular setting.
 This is the crucial initial steps in analyzing any issue using a
rational choice framework.
 With making rational choice, the scholars face uncertainty which

results not just from not knowing how others will act or respond to
your decisions but also from a general lack of information.
So the individual may make bad choice, and that does not mean
that rational choice is wrong.

40
 Indeed bad choices and less-than optimal decisions, are part –and
parcel of the rational choice framework.
 The evaluation:
 It is useful and valuable even for those researchers who are
uncomfortable reducing social and political life to self-interest
because doing so ignore the complexity of the world we live.
 In spite of these critics, this approach will be useful if we use the
“thick variant” of rationality, which accept the premise that
rationality can be institutionally, culturally, or socially conditioned
or defined.
 One of the strengths of the rational tradition is its capacity to
provide rational explanation of irrational outcomes.
 Structural tradition:
 It is a broad tradition
 The main arguments:
 It is never enough to look only or even primarily at individual
behavior of an individual actor. Instead, one must examine the
“networks”, linkages, interactions, interdependencies and among
the parts of a broader system of action.
 Structural begin analysis at a more abstract level, for example;
historical system, the international system, the social system.

41
 Structuralists believe that human action and behavior are

fundamentally shaped by the larger environments which -in turn-
are the product of the dominant economic, political and social
arrangements.
 One of these arrangements, the international system which forces
every nation state to behave in similar ways regardless of its
domestic politics.
 In comparative politics, most but not all structural arguments are

historical and the structures themselves are capable of changing or
transforming into something quite different. And the structural
change depends on the mutual relationship between structure and
agents.
 Agency is “the capacity of actors to operate independently ad also
it is the power of human beings to make choices”.
So agency implies that our lives are made by ourselves .it is
determined by us not for us.
 Some approaches in comparative politics tend to agent centered as
rational choice, economic theory, and public choice.
 Structuralists tend to argue that our choices and actions are

severely constrained, shaped or determined by structural factors.

42
 Most contemporary researchers understand that structure and

agency are interrelated; both of them affect each other.
- It might help to think of structures as deeply embedded games
which are governed by a set of unyielding rules and conventions
which define the roles for each player or part of the game.
- And you need to identify the rules of the game, and how the game
plays out and changes.
 In general, structuralists generally see these rules as far more

powerful and enduring.
 Over the years scholars have spelled out many different aspects of
the games, as larger social structure that shape and govern the
modern world.
History, the economy, and Marx:

 In comparative politics, historical structuralists are generally
concerned with economic (or material) as opposed to political
forces.
 Indeed, historical structuralists may see political processes as
essentially a reflection of economic forces.
 Most historical arguments were based on the writings of Karl Marx
(1818-1883); he argued that state is nothing more than a tool in the

43
hands of the dominant economic class. This view has been a

subject of a great deal of criticism.
 The emphasis on economic has other implications as well; one of
the most important of these is that societies consist of individuals
who occupy social classes which represent the particular category
that an individual occupies.
 In general, historical structuralists understand that historical

structure necessarily shapes the possibilities for change.
 Then it is clear that structural approaches and history are closely
connected as the structural relationships that exist in the world
today are product of history.
The broad scope of the structural tradition:

 The structural tradition is a broad one. Within it there are hard
structuralists who see that our actions are tightly constrained as
well a “soft strucuralists” who see a mush closer mutually
interaction between structure and agents.
 There are also historical, in addition, there are structuralists who

focus their analytical attention on an individual society or state as
primary unite of analysis and there are others who believe the main
unite of analysis is the system as a whole.

44
 The cultural tradition:

 The third major tradition is the cultural tradition; it is intermediate
variable as it fits between the micro and the macro level. And it sits
in the middle of the agent-structure continuum.
 It is important of thinking of culture in an open minded and
sophisticated manner.
 What is culture?
 It is a shared, learned and symbolic system of values, ideas, and
abstract mental blueprint (mental code).
 It is never completely fixed (it is inherently subjective, so culture is
never completely fixed; there is no absolutely meaning for any
culture.
 Culture exists in our heads, so it must be learned and constantly
reproduced, so human beings are not copy machines.
 In a world of multiple cultures, diffusions and the passing of
cultural practices from one society to another makes the process of
reproduction even less perfect.
 Culture shapes the behavior and actions of people, both at the

individual and collective levels.
 Culture must be understood as an inherently fluid system of
meaning, with multiple “voices” and complex influences on social,
political and economic phenomena.

45
 Culture intersects with political social and economic forces to

produce specific outcomes in specific places and time periods.
 Culture has power, not only to shape individual perceptions and
behavior, but also to unify and mobilize entire societies, sometimes
across borders.
 Culture is a political resource which can be used to achieve
political, social, and economic goals.
 Culture as cause and effect:
 The causal power of culture is ambiguous

 Culture has no independent causal power.
 Culture acts only indirectly it influences behavior by affecting the
strategic environment.
 The causal significance of culture is suspect as it doesn’t strictly
determine the behavior of actors.
 We can argue that culture is both cause and effect and it is a
product of underlying social, economic and political forces.
 Culture is complex. Its effects are not always obvious, it has power
but it is not always a causal power.

46
 A hybrid tradition: institutionalism:
 Institutionalism can be considered a distinct analytical category.

 In this regard we can differentiate between old and new
institutionalism which can be incorporated into rational choice,
structural and cultural tradition.
 Institutions were no longer limited to the concrete institutions of
government,
Instead they were defined as connected sets of rules, norms,
and practices constrain actively and shape the expectations of the
actors in short becoming a good comparativist. And doing
comparative politics requires the effective integration of method,
theory and evidence.
******************************************

47

What Is Comparative Politics?: Theory of Comparative Political Systems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What Is Comparative Politics?: Theory of Comparative Political Systems

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

What Is Comparative Politics?: Theory of Comparative Political Systems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Theory of comparative political systems

Comparative politics is a main field in political science.

Comparative politics defined

What is comparative Politics?

 Comparative politics is a very rich and dynamic field because its

Sophomore students Arabic section

 The field of comparative politics has no one single focus. It includes

1- Studies of one country, or particular institution:

 (Political party, political process, decision making or public policy,

2- Studies for two or more countries:

This kind is often difficult for the beginning students.

3- Regional or area studies:

 These may include studies of Africa, Latin America, the Middle

4- Studies across regions:

Sophomore students Arabic section

5- Global comparative studies:

 With the improved statistical data collected by the World Bank

 Comparative politics focuses on as well as countries and regimes

 From the survey of the types of research or studies in comparative

- One should recognize degrees of difficulty. For the beginning

- Such diversity is healthy and stimulating because there are

Sophomore students Arabic section

Comparative politics past and present

 Comparative politics has a long history. The foremost political

 The focus of comparative government in the period between World

 World War II had a profound effect on comparative politics in a

- It introduced the phenomenon of totalitarianism as practiced in

- It expanded the interest of comparative politics to other countries

Sophomore students Arabic section

- The period after World War II witnessed several major

 So the field of comparative politics came to the known no longer

The Development of the Methods in Comparative

1- In 1880, the first Political Science Department was built in

2- In 1903, the founding of the discipline's professional association,

3- Political science began to be independent of philosophy, law,

- During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the

Sophomore students Arabic section

- The traditional era produced a host of studies that carefully

1. Configurative description. 2. Formal legalism.

5. Non theoretical emphases. 6. Methodological insensitivity.

These characteristics have strongly marked the study of politics in

There was preoccupation with formal structures and legal

The scope of comparison was limited to western political systems.

Sophomore students Arabic section

discussion of Africa, Asia and Middle East governments was left

5) Non theoretical emphases:

The traditional issues presented by thinkers were limited in the

This stage witnessed the emergence of two paradigms in political

Sophomore students Arabic section

 It was interested in studying rational institutions, constitutional

 This school was linked to the experience of World War I. When

3. Abstract political analysis emphasized the absolute necessity of

Sophomore students Arabic section

 Behaviorism can be defined as the systematic search for political

 Behaviorists reacted against a definition of the field that restricted

 Behaviorists were opposed to what they saw as vague, rarified

Sophomore students Arabic section

 The essence of behavioral science is that all hypotheses can be