1] Range of variables – There are multiple factors which

Comparative Politics affect politics i.e. society, history, climate, geography,

economy, resources etc. And not all factors can be
What we will learn: quantified and observed. They also operate at various
1] Comparative Politics; degrees in various states.
2] Nature and major Approaches; 2] Lack of sufficient information – Public information often
3] Political economy; may not be complete and can be filtered by state agencies
4] Political sociology perspectives; e.g. China has strong control over what comes out. And
5] Limitations of the comparative method. some totalitarian countries may not release any information
at all (N. Korea). Comparison then really becomes difficult.
Introduction
3] Problem of objectivity – Certain social practices may be
Comparative politics is one of the core element of political science. too incomprehensible to a foreign mind. Objectivity then
• Comparative politics means comparing the political systems gets obscured.
of different states- as old as political theory. 4] Dynamic nature of discipline – Politics is shaped by
• Aristotle - the father of comparative politics- studied 158 multiple factors. It is never static. Comparison we may do
constitutions and gave the classification of constitutions. today may not be relevant tomorrow. This also creates a
• Comparative politics can be divided into two phases. problem.
o traditional comparative politics - 2nd WW - modern Method of comparative politics.
comparative politics.
Even today there is no unanimity among scholars in regard
Why Comparative Politics is important? to method to be used in comparative politics. Various
• Comparison is at the heart of analysis of any phenomenon - methods can be used depending on purpose of comparison.
meaning is searched - Whenever scientific and objectivity Prior to 1914, 2 forms of comparison existed.
are required- comparison is a method.
Until mid 18th century, approach was normative and
• Natural sciences have luxury of laboratory, but in Political
philosophical. It studied existing situation and proposed
Science, comparison is a substitute for laboratory condition.
blueprint for future e.g. what type of future can be build.
• Not only dis-similarities but similarities are also compared.
With expansion of democracies in west, from middle of 18th
century, legalistic-constitutional approach emerged. It
Advantages of comparative politics.
included study of constitution and laws of states. It
1] Gaining knowledge -By comparison at micro level and one
dominated till 1st World War.
learns about politics of different countries. It helps in
After 2nd World War, we see emergence of modern
understanding our own country and politics in better way.
comparative methods. Along with comparing constitutions
2] Evaluating good practices and avoiding mistakes – Every
these approaches also focus on study of society, politics,
system innovates / develops as a response to situations.
culture etc. spc
There is no paradigm shift in Social Sciences after few years
like Natural Science. Thus we can benefit from research How to compare?
already done by someone else.
For example, democracy developed in western Comparing similar things and different things. This is also
countries but later imported to 3rd world. Institution matter of debate. Both have their purpose and rational.
of Lokpal is also inspired from practice in European Why comparison should be of similar situations?
countries.
3] Enhances Objectivity – to make studies more objective. Like sciences, it is keeping experimental conditions same. It
To avoid criticism of ethnocentrism. Earlier, whatever helps in identifying factors which make difference. Factors
studies were made, it was criticised and being ethnocentric. responsible for that phenomenon.
It was criticised as cultural imperialism.
Why comparison of dis-similar situation?
4] Comparative method to make enterprise more scientific.
It helps in better analysis and understanding. It strengthens the hypothesis of theory i.e. the assumption
5] It allows verification/rejection of behavioural trends and is true only in given circumstances and changing certain factors
patterns of people under certain circumstances. changes the outcome.
6] How different institutions function in different
atmosphere can be understood by comparative politics.
Limitations of comparative politics. Traditional comparative politics

Analysis of traditional approach.

 • Traditional comparative politics was very narrow in its Modern methods in comparative politics can be listed as following.
scope. It included just the study of the constitutions of the 1. Systems approach
western world. Since rest of the countries were colonies and 2. Structural functional approach.
had no independent political systems 3. Political Development
• Because all western countries have been at similar level of 4. Political Modernization
development, their societies, culture, way of life does not 5. Political Culture
differ from each other. Hence there were few basis for 6. Political Sociology
comparisons. The maximum comparison could be done only 7. Political Economy
that of the constitutions or the forms of governments.
1] Systems Approach: David Easton
Hence traditional comparative politics was the study of
government. It is better to call it ‘comparative Introduction
government’ rather than comparative politics.
Since constitutions or the forms of governments was the Purpose of system approach was to develop scientific model. To
focus of the study, the method that was used was legal develop a grand theory / model which can be utilised to study
institutional i.e. study of laws and institutions. political systems of different countries . To create a model which is
• The approach did not observe the norms like value value free. Talcott Parsons was a source of influence for David
neutrality, quantification etc. And since it focused on study Easton. He has developed social system analysis in sociology.
of institutions, it was largely static and suffered from Basic concepts in systems approach
number of limitations.
1] The concept of system
Limitations of traditional comparative politics. System is a set of elements in the state of interaction. Interaction is
1. Narrow in scope – excluded political systems of non-western patterned and not haphazard. Behaviouralists aimed to make political
countries. science ‘science’, hence they imported the concepts of natural
2. Static – focused on the study of constitutions, rather than politics. sciences like system from biology.
3. Essentially non comparative – The only point of comparison was 2] Concept of political system
constitutions. Just like there are different systems in a body there are different
Hence traditional approach is criticised as ethnocentric (just focused systems in a society.
on west), parochial, limited.
How to distinguish one system from the other?
Comparative govt. vs Comparative politics Though structures vary, yet the important basis to differentiate is the
Government represent the set of institutions. Comparative govt. function. According to David Eastern, the function of the political
focuses on study of constitutions and statues. system is ‘authoritative’ allocation of values. Allocation of values
Politics denote processes. Hence when we study social, economic, denote deciding the distribution of goods, resources, honours, titles
cultural and psychological, formal and informal practices beyond or deciding who will get what. (The prime decision making body).
constitutions we understand politics. Along with constitution and Authoritative denotes power to make binding decisions. Means
laws, comparative politics includes study of civil society, cultural punish in case people do not follow the rules or laws.
factors, domestic as well as international politics Traditionalists use the term state. The term state denotes
‘institutions’. Thus state is a term used in institutionalist approach
whereas the term ‘political system’ is a behaviouralists approach.
Modern comparative politics and its features System not only denotes the structures, it also denotes processes or
functions. System denotes set of elements/environment in which a
Reason for emergence of modern comp. politics
particular institution is based. (Refer diagram.) All such things or
After 2nd World War, world witnessed decolonisation and the
subsystems which impact the main system is called as environment
emergence of ‘third world’ countries. Third world countries are too
of that system.
diverse, there is a difference in theory and practice, text and context.
Hence it was realiesd that it is not sufficient if we just go for the study
of constitutions and statutes (laws). We will have to understand the
socio-cultural factors in these societies.
The need for the study of developing areas coincided with the
behavioural movement. Behavioural techniques made the study of
modern comparative politics possible and the need to study new
areas itself motivated scholars to make new innovations in
approaches. Many new methods to study comparative politics were
developed in the following period.
 Marxists are critical of behaviouralists. Behaviouralism emerged at
the time of cold-war. It was initiative of American political scientists.
Most of the behavioural research were directed towards
understanding and explaining the social realities in ‘socialist’
countries. e.g. Elitist theory of democracy is an example of
behavioural – empirical research. Elitist theory of democracy has
shown that ‘oligarchy’ is the iron law. It means whether a country is
socialist or liberal, power will always be in the hands of elites.
Situation is better in western countries because elite structure is
fractured. Thus Marxists looked at behaviouralism as a conspiracy
against socialist countries.

According to the Marxists systems approach is status-quoist. Systems

approach is not universalist.- modelled on the political systems of
3] Concept of Boundary. western countries.
Every system has its boundary. Boundary denotes the limit of
Systems approach gives too much focus on system maintenance.
environment. Systems kept out of boundary do not impact the main
They do not explain crisis in the system. They have not pointed
system.
towards the protests, revolutions, disruptions. They project as if
4] Operation of Political system. system is capable of absorbing all types of challenges.
According to David Eastern, we can conceive political system as a
Scientific model has to be universalist, unbiased but this model is not
machine. Every machine functions on the principle of input and
universalist. It takes western model as an ideal. Hence political
output. A conversion machine which converts input into output.
systems which are not based on the western model will appear
Political system gets input from the environment.
defective or problematic.
5] Input are of two types.
Marxists suggest that the system is not even correct explanation of
1. Demands
even the western countries. It shows as if there are no problems in
Demands are what people want from the system. There are four
the western countries. Political system operates smoothly, there are
types of demands: 1. Demand for regulation, 2. Demand for
no disruptions, protests.
participation, 3. Demand for distribution, 4. Demand for
communication. Political system is status quoist. (As it is) It is not change oriented. It
2. Support projects American system as the ideal type. It means they show as if
Support show people’s support for the system which is necessary for there is no system which can be considered as better than this
the functioning of the system. Support is also of four types. 1. system. For Marxists, even western countries should move towards
Material support (e.g. tax) 2. Obedience to law 3. Participation in the communist model.
govt. programs 4. Paying attention to govt. communication.
2] Structural Functional Approach – Almond and Powell
6] Output functions.
If a single decision comes, it will be treated as a decision. If multiple The approach was developed To address some of the deficiencies in
decisions come, it reflects policy. systems approach. Systems approach was too general. It does not tell
in detail about the structures and processes within the political
7] Concept of Feedback system. And systems approach was criticized for being too static. It
Feedback play very important role in the maintenance of the system. was modelled on western countries hence was not found to be very
Outputs interact with the environment, they re-enter into the system relevant for the study of ‘developing societies’. Thus limited
through the feedback loop. If feedback loop does not exist, system importance in comparative politics.
will collapse.
Even structural functional approach is based on Easton’s model.
Critical evaluation Therefore Systems approach remains the basic conceptual
framework. However it takes ‘micro-view’ rather than the macro-
Traditionalists
view. It is aimed at formulating more ‘universalist’ model so that it is
It brings unnecessary complications, unnecessary jargons. It does not useful for developing countries.
have much analytical importance. It is just a very preliminary
Almond and Powell looked into the developments in other
conceptual framework. It can be utilised only at the initial level of
disciplines. They found the approach of anthropologists like
research. Its only importance can be a conceptual framework for the
Malinowski and Radcliff Brown also useful. They’ve (anthropologists)
collection of data.
shown that all societies performed some essential functions which
Marxist are necessary, however societies may vary with respect to the
structures performing such functions. It means every society / Criticism
political system may have to perform the function of security but the
Same as systems approach.
structure or the institutions performing these functions may vary.
4] Political Modernisation
Structural functional approach takes the dynamic view of the political
system. According to them, different political systems are at the Samuel P Huntington, Edward Shils
different stages of development. The approach utilizes the concepts Political development approach was seen as biased. It is seen as
of institutional approach to give the micro-view of the functioning of biased because it defines political development in the form of
the political system. movement of a political system in the lines of western liberal
democracy. e.g. Political development for China requires that China
Political System according to Structural Functional approach consists
should move towards democracy. Hence Marxist challenge that
of four Inputs functions and three output functions.
political development model is biased. Hence scholars invented a
4 Inputs functions and their structures new parameter for comparison. This new parameter is

Political socialization and Family, School, Peer Rule Making Legislature, but some rules
recruitment group, Society are made by Exe and Jud
also.

Political communication Mass media

Rule Executive, but some
Execution executions are done by Leg
Interest articulation Interest groups, and Jud also.
Pressure groups

Rule Judiciary, but some

Interest Aggregation Political Parties Adjudication functions are done by Exe
and Leg also.
3 Output functions and their structures
‘modernization’.
Critical Evaluation
Modernization is an economic category. It denotes the nature of
Traditionalists: Same as criticism of systems approach.
economic development. Modernization denotes a)
Marxist: Same as before.
Industrialization. b) Urbanisation c) Secularisation d)
Though it does not removes all the defects of the systems approach,
Rationalisation. If we compare on above parameters, ideological
yet it is an improvement in the sense that it gives more detailed view
dimension looses importance. Thus political modernization overlaps
of the political system. However lacks much analytical importance.
with the ‘end of ideology’ thesis. It shows that ideological differences
3] Political Development Approach do not matter much, so long countries go towards modernization.

Type of approach: Behavioural. According to Samuel P Huntington when countries go for

Purpose: Study of developing areas. modernization, it ultimately move towards democracy.
Exponents: Lucian Pye, F. W. Riggs. Modernization thesis face a major challenge in context of China.
Ideally China should have moved towards democracy after economic
Lucian Pye has given the parameter of political development. We can modernization, however in case of China, the control of communist
compare the countries on the basis of amount of development. party has become more entrenched. Communist party has an
Political development should not be confused with economic example of USSR. Hence Chinese communist party has not gone for
development. Political development means the development of democratic reforms.
democracy. According to Lucian Pye, there are 3 parameters of
political development. 1) Equality – Equality means increasing Above analysis show that even political modernization theory is not
political equality or political participation. 2) Capacity – Capacity completely neutral. It does have the inherent agenda.
denotes the capacity of the state to enforce laws. * e.g. Gunnar
5] Political Culture Approach
Myrdal has used the term ‘soft state’ for India because of poor
capacity. 3) Differentiation – Means functional specialization. Sidney Verba & Gabriel Almond (Almond and Verba) – THE CIVIC
CULTURE (book)
Samuel P Huntington added the concept of ‘political decay’. Riggs
added the concept of Development Trap. Sometimes development According to these scholars culture can be a determinant for
may get trapped when all dimensions of development do not develop comparisons because culture is a long term phenomenon. Culture
equally. denotes the set of norms, values, orientations of the people. Political
culture is a subset of culture. It denotes people’s norms, values, scenario for democracy is when majority has participant culture, but
orientations with respect to the political system. some sections also have the subject and parochial culture.

Almond and Verba have used the concepts from following 6] Political Sociology Approach
approaches to explain the types of political cultures.
History of Political Sociology
1] The concept of ideal types given by Max Weber. Ideal types
denotes formulation of models. Aristotle, who is considered as father of political science, is also
2] Easton’s input and output approach. considered as father of political sociology. His theory of revolution
3] Almond and Verba have developed certain ideal types of political where he explained the sociological factors like rising inequalities as
cultures. The prominent types can be discussed as following. the cause of revolution can be considered as an example of political
sociology.
Parochial political culture
We can also put forward the example of Machiavelli. Machiavelli
Parochial political culture denotes the attitude of the people towards
prescribed that the form of govt. depends on the nature of society. If
the political system where people are not very much connected with
society is corrupt, then the rule of the prince who rules with the iron
the system. They feel themselves at the margins or periphery.
hand.
e.g. Tribes living in Andaman have a very peripheral position with
respect to what goes in the Indian political system. Above examples show that political sociology deals with the issues
Parochial political culture can be explained through input-output which are located at the interface of politics and society.
model. When people neither influence input nor influence output,
their culture is called as parochial. Origin of Modern Political Sociology.

Subject political culture We can consider Karl Marx as a father of modern political sociology.
It was Karl Marx who suggested that to understand politics, we have
When people matter only at output, they are not very influential at to understand the basic structure of the society. Politics cannot be
input level. It means they are not in a position to determine what studies independently. Marx proposed base and superstructure
political system should do, however they matter in terms of the model as a method of analysis.
implementation of policies. It means political system is concerned Against Marxist approach to political sociology, emerged another
about people’s reactions. school known as Weberian school. Max Weber challenged Marxist
mode of analysis as monocausal explanation. There are two
e.g. India’s political culture till 80s and 90s was primarily ‘Subject
prominent schools in political sociology – Marxian and Weberian.
Political Culture’. People were not in a position to influence the
policies which could go inside the political system but political system Impact of behavioural movement.
could not entirely ignore how people will react.
e.g. One of the reason for inability of the Indian elites to take Political sociology approaches where further enriched by behavioural
economic reforms earlier was the fear that people may not support studies and methods. Even scholars like David Easton proposed that
such policies. instead of institutional approach, politics should be studies with
‘systemic perspective’. It has been felt that specifically for developing
Participant political culture areas the study of constitutions will not be enough. It is necessary to
understand the socio-cultural environment in a country.
People play active role at both the levels. Input as well as output. It
means they have active participation in the formulation of the laws Political sociology has become a most prominent approach in
and are not just at the receiving end of the political system. comparative politics. Political sociologist deal with the issues located
at the interface of politics and society. It tries to understand the
e.g. The political culture of Switzerland can be said to be the
interaction between decision making authorities and conflictual
participant.
social forces and interests. For example same institutions function at
Even in India, there is a growth of participant culture since the
different levels in different societies. Democracy may be successful in
beginning of 21st century. The assertion of civil society, to get Jan
USA but in some country of Africa it may lead to more anarchy.
Lokpal Bill implemented is an example of the growing participant
culture in India. The four main areas of research in Political Sociology are:
Civic Culture 1] The socio-political formation of modern state.
2] How social inequality between different groups i.e. caste, class,
Civic culture is considered to be most conducive for democracy. Civic
religion etc. influences politics.
culture is a combination of Participant culture, Subject political
3] How public opinion, ideologies, political parties, pressure groups,
culture and Parochial political culture. According to the idea of civic
social movements and trends outside formal political institutions
culture, excessive participant culture is not good. Excessive
affect formal politics.
participation may convert democracy into mobocracy. The best
4] Power relationships within and between social groups i.e. families, prescription to resolve the crisis in governance.
bureaucracy, media etc. Since the focus on society, this approach alone is not sufficient and
should be used with other approaches like political economy and
The three major frameworks employed in political sociology are
institutional approach.
1) Pluralism
7] Political Economy
2) Elite or managerial theory and
3) Class analysis. In the east political economy goes back to Ancient India.
Kautilya’s ARTHASHASTRA can be treated as the first textbook in
Pluralism sees politics as a contest among different competing
political economy. According to Kautilya, the most important
interest groups.
obligation of the state is to secure the material well being of its
Elite theory focuses on the role of elites in management of power. In
people.
modern times, elites are leaders, those having strong organisational
(managerial) skill. Weber / Theda Skocpol proposes this mode of In the west, the tradition of political economy starts with Adam
understanding. Smith. His WEALTH OF NATIONS is considered as the first textbook.
Class analysis (Marxist) framework emphasises the role of capitalist
Political economy show the interface of economics and politics. In
class. According to them propertied class influence and operates
political economy, scholars analyze ‘economic policies’ of the state.
politics.
Influence of political factors on economic outcomes of state and vice
Some of the prominent works and the scholars who have used versa. It studies the influence of political institutions like legislature,
political sociology in Indian context are: executive, judiciary in implementation and formulation of economic
policies.
Andre Beteille – who has studied the role of caste;
Paul Brass – studied the role of religion; Political economy approach helps us in understanding the nature of
Christophe Jaffrelot – studied role of RSS; the state as well as suggests the type of public policy which a country
Yogendra Yadav – analysis India’s electoral behaviour. can adopt. Political economy is a useful approach because it has the
qualities of being quantitative as well as prescriptive.
What is the status of political sociology?
The approach also includes the trade policies of country and the role
Political sociology has once attracted lot of attention of political
of international financial institution directive/norms etc. e.g.
scholars but later on they have realised that political sociology makes
countries facing CAD are more vulnerable to dictates of IMF than
politics too much dependent on society. Further, the approach is also
countries with strong exports.
used by sociologists. Therefore there is a fear that political science
will loose its independent identity. It will get submerged in the Political economy approach has different schools of thought.
discipline of sociology.
1] The classical and utilitarian approach represented by Adam Smith,
Theda Skocpol calls for ‘Bringing the state back in’. It means political
David Ricardo, J. Bentham.
science should not get submerged in sociology. We have to give
2] Marxist approach represented by Karl Marx, Lenin, Engels, Rosa
centrality to the study of the state in the discipline. It is true that
Luxemburg.
society influence politics but it is also true that politics also shape
3] Neo Marxist school – dependency school represented by A G
society. e.g. Under the leadership of Charismatic leaders like Pandit
Frank, Sameer Amin
Nehru, Indian society was being transformed into a modern society.
Structuralist school – represented by Hamza Alvi.
Presently there has been so much growth in political sociology in
4] Welfare economics – represented by Keynes, Galbreath and in
terms amount of research that it has become a hybrid discipline in
contemporary times by Amartya Sen, Jean Dreze.
itself rather than just the approach.
5] Neo Liberal school – represented by Hyek, Nozick, Jagdish
Limitations of political sociology approach Bhagwati, Arvind Pangariya.
6] Public Choice school – James Buchanan.
1] Political sociology suffers from the factor of over-emphasis on
society. The society is emphasised so much so that Theda Skocpol Political economy approach has also been used widely in context of
calls for ‘bringing the state back in’. the study of India by scholars like Pranab Bardhan, Atul Kohli,
2] It undermines the role institutions play in politics. Structure of Rudolph and Rudolph, Francine Frankel, Gunnar Myrdal. They have
politics also influences the power relations. analyzed land reforms, green revolution, neo liberal economic
3] It ignores role economy play in politics. This has led to the policies etc.
separate development of political economy approach in comparative The disadvantage of political economy approach is that it is just
politics. focused on analyzing the economic policies. Hence to be used in
4] Due to globalization… combination with other approaches.
5] It is also more analytical in nature. Thus it lack the utility in
Que. Critically examine the Marxist aspect of political economy.
Comparative politics is one of the oldest disciplines. There are various
approaches to the study of comparative politics, political economy is
one such approach. The tradition of political economy in east is as old
as Kautilya. Modern political economy in west has its origin in Adam
Smith.

Political economy approach analyses countries economic policies.

Basically macroeconomic policies. Political economy has an
advantage of being quantitative and qualitative. It is prescriptive in
nature and normative in approach.

There are different schools of political economy, the oldest school is

classical school represented by Adam Smith, who favoured Laissez
Faire model.

Marxist approach emerged as a reaction against Adam Smith’s

political economy. Marx believed that Adam Smith’s policies will lead
to the wealth of few and not the entire nation. Marx prescribed
social ownership of means of production.

Neo-Marxist added new approaches which can be used for the

analysis of post colonial societies. The instrumentalist approach
known as dependency school – AG Frank…. – has been utilised to
study the states in Latin America, Africa, Middle East… Bourgeoise…
Structuralist school represented by Hamza Alvi is utilised for the
analysis of the states in South Asia.

To conclude we can say that Marxist approach is primarily the

criticism of liberal approaches and the operation of capitalism at
different levels.