What influence have the rationalist, structuralist and culturalist theoretical approaches had on the study of comparative politics?
Comparative politics is the empirical comparative study of political systems. It involves the classification and comparison of institutions - ‘a rule that has been institutionalised’ (Lane and Ersson, 1999: 23) - in order to determine the nature of political regimes. The study of comparative politics has come to be guided by three major research schools: rational choice theory, culturalist analysis and structuralist approaches; each of which spearhead a distinctive notion over what about institutions affects the nature of the political process. Rationalists are methodological individualists who assert that
…show more content…
Cultural theorists therefore focus their studies on ‘group level processes’ (ibid) when conducting research. However, as highlighted by survey researchers Almond and Verba, by identifying cultural variables, it is almost inevitable that analysts will engage in generalised comparative study. Synthesis can be found between cultural analysis and less rigid forms of structural institutionalism. Political theorist Antonio Gramsci pointed out that coherence between these two schools of thought can be found when considering the fact that whilst, according to Marxist teachings, capitalist societies are based on underlying structural conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the manifestation of such conflict is dependent on the cultural circumstances of the country concerned. Similarly to culturalists, structuralists adopt a form of methodological holism. Structuralists task themselves with identifying the underlying dynamics that govern social systems as a whole, and upon doing so are able to embark on comparison between larger groups of countries governed by similar systems; they are unconcerned by ‘the ‘micro-details’ of the political process’ (Bara and Pennington, 1997: 26). It is therefore said that a structuralist approach appertains to ‘the relationships - both static and dynamic - among individuals, collectivities, institutions, or organisations’ (Lichbach, 1997: 247).
Rationalist theorists stipulate that individuals act to
Sociology is the study the different aspects of humanity and society. It encompasses a very broad and varying range of topics. It can be studied on a large world-wide scale spanning across several countries, which is called Macrosociology. It can also be studied on a small scale looking at only individual families or neighborhoods, which is called Microsociology. Not only does it peer into humans’ interactions with each other but examines why they act the way they do. It considers the environment, as well as how access to different luxuries can contribute to the people that we become. In this fascinating field there are three primary views on exactly what the fundamental driving force behind society is. Symbolic Interactionalism, the belief that symbols and the meaning that they are given, define how we will perceive life, in this philosophy these meanings are influenced by society and the events of individual lives. Functional Analysis, views society as any other organism, in this theory all parts of the whole must work together cohesively to function. Conflict theory takes a somewhat opposite view than Functionalism, this perspective suggests that rather than wanting to work in unison, society’s underlying motive is a power struggle for resources. Over the course of this paper the reader will explore these different perspectives.
Throughout the world there are many diverse political cultures. A political culture is the attitudes, beliefs or practices among a group of likeminded individuals. (Giardino pg. 27) There are different categories that embrace a political culture like an Individualistic, traditionalistic and moralistic. An individualistic culture is one that prefers less government involvement. The traditionalists’ culture maintains government as the social and economic hierarchy and does not like change. The moralistic culture favors public good and it revolves around social issues. In shaping a political culture demographics such as population size, growth, distribution and diversity are essential to determine how a state is in any of the three categories. Society is strongly affected by decisions of who, what and when does an individual receive any types of goods or services. Government is the structure, buildings and institutions that are held within politics.
This response addresses question four and define the provided theories, which include structural functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism. In doing so, various components of the theories are identified in relation to the topic of social change. In doing so, it is important to point out that in sociology, theories are used to explain the patterns, the way groups of people decide to perform specific actions, and the way societies do certain things or rather experience a change in a different manner. On the other hand, social change implies the growth and development of a social order, which bears some significant consequences.
The structure and agency debate is a common one in the field of sociology and different theorists come up with different ways of accounting for the actions of social actors. This essay takes the position that structuration solves the problem of this much contested debate. Initially key concepts and elements of structuration will be pointed out .These elements include structure, agency, social systems and power amongst many others. Subsequently, there will be engagement of a discussion of different schools of thought and finally it will be demonstrated how structuration prevails over the structure-agency debate.
A voter can be defined as an individual who votes, or has the right to vote, in elections. Voting behaviour is explained using the concepts of expressive voting and strategic voting. A rational voter would act more strategically, that is, the voter would vote to produce an election outcome which is as close as possible to his or her own policy preferences, rather than voting on the basis of party attachment, ideology, or social group membership (expressive voting). Strategic voting has become more important than voting on the basis of political cleavages (expressive voting), so voters have become more rational in their approach, however there is always an element of expressiveness in their behaviour. Political parties were initially formed to represent the interests of particular groups in society however, as these parties became more universal in the appeal of their policy programmes, voting behaviour shifted from expressive to strategic. This essay explores the reasons behind the declining importance of political cleavages, and the rise of strategic voting.
Every country differs in their preference of political system to govern their countries. For democratic countries, two possible choices of governing are the presidential system and the parliamentary system. Since both the presidential and the parliamentary systems have their own strengths and weaknesses, many scholars have examined these two forms of government, and debate on which political system is more successful in governance. In this paper, I will first provide a detailed analysis of both the parliamentary and the presidential system. I will also evaluate each system’s strengths and weaknesses, addressing any differences as well as any commonalities. Finally, I will conclude by using historical examples to analyze and support the
In sociological theory there are many concepts discussed that are utilized in the analyses of society and culture. Some of the main concepts are Postmodernism, Historical Materialism, Structuralism, Interpretive Sociology and Poststructuralism to name a few. These theories are relevant to the research of understanding certain or specific cultural texts. These concepts provide problems and solutions associated with some of the research approaches fore-mentioned. Analysing the main dimensions will be covered by discussing the appropriate concepts separately and by individually contrasting the classical and modern theories with Quentin
In today 's society, culture is impacting our everyday life, experience and social relations; we are all categorized by our cultural “groups”, but this has changed rapidly throughout the years from one generation to the next. Cultural studies were developed in the late 1950’s, through the 1970’s by the British academic scholars. The British scholars were able engaged cultural analysis and the developed then transformed of the different fields, for example, politically, theoretically and empirically that are now represented around the world.
A second comparison that one could make is that the types of governments also have
This essay seeks to compare and contrast structural consensus and conflict theories of social action such as Durkheimian, Parsonian, Marxist and Weberian with interpretivist perspectives. The aim is to outline the main features of each theory whilst critically analysing the similarities and differences between them. It will also examine the relevance of these theories within modern day society.
The next category is the nation public law- which involves the judicial process, civil rights, liberties and the importance of such terms as equal opportunity and due process in the United States. The following category is Comparative government which raises the same questions of politics, administration and law about other countries. Moreover, it also moves towards conclusion based on comparison between them. Finally, International politics deals with relations between the states and other international actors, such as multinational corporations, the United Nations and with the fundamental realities of power based on resources, wealth, military care and national security. All these may directly and indirectly affect our lives as citizens.
This paper will critically evaluate the methodology used in Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. By relying on what the methodological arguments that were taught this semester, this paper will discuss and evaluate in detail the various methodological strategies employed by the author. For the ‘Theory’ theme, this paper will examine casual mechanisms (and methodological individualism) topic, closely referencing the course reading Social Mechanisms by Peter Hedstrom and Richard Swedbeg. Next, for the ‘Measurement and Data’ theme, this paper will specifically examine the measurement validity and reliability topic, and will closely reference “Measurement validity: A Shared Standard for qualitative and Quantitative Research” by Robert Adcock and David Colllier. Finally, for the ‘Testing Theory with Data Theory’, this paper will be examining the history as an explanation topic, closely referencing “The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative and Counterfactuals in Historical Intuitionalism” by Giovanni Capoccia and Daniel Kelemen, as well as the relevant topic, Quantitative versus Qualitative Methods. The paper will start by summarizing the readings relevant to the topics of the themes, then delve into the pertinent methodology in Putnam’s book.
Rational choice theory is actually more than one theory per se, but the basic similarities among its variants mean that they can be intelligibly amalgamated for the purposes of critiquing its implementation in political science. Therefore public choice theory, positive political science, rational actor models, and the economic approach to politics, among others, refer to what we may call rational choice theory for the purposes of this essay. (See Green and Shapiro 1994, xi.
Moravcsik argues in “Taking Preferences Seriously...” that state policy is the result of internal factors – including identity, economics, and the internal system of governance – what he calls a “bottom-up” approach,4 and that a state 's actions have more complex roots than Realism 's proposal of survival, power, etc. According to Moravcsik, we cannot assume
Michel Crozier argues that despite the many issues surrounding the governability of European democracies (Crozier, 1973, 39), the crisis of democracy in Europe arises on a more basic level from our understanding of “the relationship of institutional values to behavior”- a relationship that has defined European government and societies for centuries (Crozier, 1973, 40). Devoid of rapid economic and technological change, people were able to define goals according to their preferences. Generally, this meant that the “technical knowledge of societies” could provide them with the means to create certain political goals. (Crozier, 1973, 40) Despite this fact, Crozier emphasizes that a since the