Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Culture in comparative politics
The tension between liberty and equality democracy in america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Culture in comparative politics
Defining Political Development No consensus has been reached on the definition of political development; however most scholars agree it is multi-faceted concept. Comparative politics often promotes itself as an empirical field of study; however the categories, statistics and indicators we choose to measure a particular concept often reveal, at best a subconscious bias, and at worst an overt normative agenda. Furthermore, whichever definition and subcategories we decide are sufficient, political development often encompasses attributes that are difficult to measure numerically. That being said, there are some criteria that are common across the many definitions of political development, one of which is modernisation. Prominent political scientist, Samuel Huntington, listed four sub-categories of modernisation: rationalisation, national integration, democratisation and mobilisation [insert citation]. He further concluded, of these four, only mobilisation (and participation) are measurable and applicable to developing world. In addition, he asserted that institutionalisation is a more important facet of political development, citing four sub-categories: adaptability, complexity, autonomy and coherence. If institutionalisation is rapidly outpaced by modernisation, specifically mobilisation and participation, the end is result is political decay rather than political development. Again, it is important to note the normative subtext that underlies these studies. In the case of Huntington, Przeworski & Limongi, and many studies on the subject, there is an implicit, and often explicit, assumption that democracy is the most developed form of governance. This cultural bias towards a Western model of government, and specifically a ... ... middle of paper ... ...one of the reasons Lipset's study has enjoyed enduring relevance. Conversely, Przeworski and Limongi [1997] limit their measurements of economic development to GNP per capita only. They did so to “stick as close a possible to the elementary descriptive pattern”. More elaborately, to establish an empirical connection between economic development and democracy, before delving into the mechanisms that connect them. Both methodologies have their advantages and limitations; however I would argue, it is important to establish a completely accurate picture of economic development, and this cannot be achieved with a single indicator. Are political and economic development linked? Arguably, no area has been as thoroughly researched and debated in comparative politics as the relationship between economic development and political development, specifically democratisation.
Political globalization is “carried out by institutions and systems, whether formal or informal, that transcend national or regional interests and address global issues.” (Davies 1). To understand political globalization, one must understand what falls under the category of politics, which involves the government, laws, and bureaucracies. Government allows for there to be stability in a country or region, as well as having agreements with the people.
In contemporary times, the rise of capitalism as a dominant economic trend and its ravenous demand to accumulate sources from new markets, has led to the idea of merging political and economic power into one, which is democratic capitalism or otherwise illustrated as “a system where markets allocate income according to efficiency while governments redistribute income according to political demand. "(Iversen, 2006). The advancements mentioned earlier, have given ground for questions concerning the possible compatibility of the political ideology which is democracy and the economic ideology capitalism and how would they affect one another. This mergence could be examined in recent times, whereas in the past around the start of the nineteenth century it was considered as inappropriate and unlikely to happen. This paper aims to demonstrate to what degree are democracy and capitalism compatible, by examining the various areas of conflict of the two ideologies, how has capitalism affected the democratic system in the United States and does actually global capitalism have an impact on the developing countries democracies.
Danziger, James N. Understanding the Political World: A Comparative Introduction to Political Science. New Jersey: Pearson, 2013. Print.
The political culture that defines American politics shows that despite this compromise, America is still very much a democratic society. The very history of the country, a major contributor to the evolution of its political culture, shows a legacy of democracy that reaches from the Declaration of Independence through over two hundred years to today’s society. The formation of the country as a reaction to the tyrannical rule of a monarchy marks the first unique feature of America’s democratic political culture. It was this reactionary mindset that greatly affected many of the decisions over how to set up the new governmental system. A fear of simply creating a new, but just as tyrannic... ...
From Peter Hall and Rosemary Taylor's study of "New Institutionalism". "New Institutionalism" term that now appear with developing predominance in political science. A portion of the ambiguities obscurity wrapping the new institutionalism can be scattered on the off chance that we see that it doesn't shape a brought together substance of cerebration. Hall and Rosemary introduce three theories of "Institutionalism": "Historical Institutionalism", "Rational Choice Institutionalism", and "Sociological Institutionalism". These theories were enhanced in response to the behavioral view that was legitimate amid the 1960's and 1970's and solicitations to clarify the parts of foundations in demonstrating social and political outgrowth. Among the three
In order to understand how these influences or principles have spread, it must also be figured out how these principles developed. Again here, it must be asserted that the historical context is of vital importance because it reveals the manner in which some actions that took place at particular points in time had formed consensus notions. It is these notions that were carried through and developed into what have become western democratic principles. These had evidently developed with the passage of time due to the occurrences that took place on the American continent; the types of people that landed there were responsible for the influences they had in the formulation of law. Though other western countries experienced similar transition America is one country that must be particularly mentioned (Kagan et al, 2000).
Lijphart, Arend. "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method." American Political Science Review. 65 (1971): 682-693.
As a result, political repression and political laziness often run rampant. Under these circumstances, the incumbent party is almost always re-elected because of the appeasive payoffs that they are able to finance from resource wealth (Wantchekon, 1999, p. 20).... ... middle of paper ... ... Norman, C. N. (2008).
Do political and economic development go together? Do countries that develop economically also become more democratic?
Firstly, K. Isbester mentions that democracy has a different meaning for everyone, as some can define democracy as a good aspect for development, on the contrary other believe that it is nothing more than voting after several years. Although, Latin America see democratic g...
Democracy is robust, widely accepted and highly anticipated around the world. It is the triumphant form of government; dominantly used in Europe, North and South and America and becoming reformed and taking new roots in Africa and Asia. Although the term democracy is based on its Greek origin, demos kratos, meaning people rule, the term cannot be simply understood as such. Due to vast coverage, the adaptation of democracy has varied greatly, whether regionally, nationally, by state or through different branches of government. Perhaps this can be advantageous when the different categorizations listed above can use democracy to rule and suit themselves best, but other factors, such as globalization and neoliberalism, has caused the need for
When looking through the topic of development, two drastically different ways to assess it arise. The majority of the western world looks at development in terms of per capita GNP. This means each country is evaluated on a level playing field, comparing the production of each country in economic value. Opposite this style of evaluation is that of the alternative view, which measures a country’s development on its ability to fulfill basic material and non-material needs. Cultural ties are strong in this case as most of the population does not produce for wealth but merely survival and tradition.
Rodney’s argument is broken down into six chapters each consisting of several subdivisions and case studies supporting his principle argument. The first chapter works towards defining the terms of development and underdevelopment and argues the comparative nature of these terms; a country is only ‘underdeveloped’ by European standards. This chapter begins by tracing European development from its early stages of communalism through feudalism and finally capitalism. Then, he works towards developing an understanding of the term ‘underdevelopment’ and through an analysis of a variety of development indices what it constitutes in present day society: “In Niger, one doctor must do for 56, 140 people; in Tunisia one doctor for every 8,320 Tunisians”(18). The Marxist concept of inherent inequalities within the international capitalist system un...
"The richly divergent patterns of economic development around the world hinge on the interplay of critical junctures and institutional drift. Existing political and economic institutions - sometimes shaped by a long process of institutional drift and sometimes resulting from divergent responses to prior critical junctures-create the anvil upon which future change will be forged."(109-110) Institutional drift is introduced as an instrument to further explain institutional evolution; used to explain the process of economical change.
There have been enormous efforts to spread democracy as a political system throughout the world by the developed democratic countries and the international development organizations including the World Bank. By the late 1990s the United States alone spent over a half billion dollars to promote democratic expansion throughout the world (Diamond, 2003). These were done considering that the democratic system leads towards development. As a result in the late 20th century we saw a huge political transformation towards democracy. During the last few decades a huge number of countries adopted democracy as their political system. However, it retain a big question how far democracy is successful in bringing development of a country? At this stage, some people also criticizes the effort of democratization arguing that it is done without considering the context of a country, sometimes democracy is not ideal for all countries and it is an effort to extinct diversity of political system. In studying the literature regarding the debate, we found a paradoxical relationship between democracy and development. Some argue that democracy has failed to ensure expected outcomes in terms of development. While others confronted that democracy has a considerable impact on development. Another group of people argue that form of political system actually does not have any impact on development process. On the verge of these debates, some development institutions and academics throw light on why democracy is not working properly, and what measure should be taken to make it more successful in bringing effective development of developing countries. Consequently, this writing is an effort of revisiting the different views about impact of democra...