Chapter 5 Political Systems and Their Rules Comparative Politics: Structures and Choices 2e By Lowell Barrington.

Chapter 5

Political Systems and Their Rules 

Comparative Politics: Structures and Choices 2eComparative Politics: Structures and Choices 2e

By Lowell BarringtonBy Lowell Barrington

Learning Objectives Define key concepts such as political institution,

democracy, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and federal versus unitary systems.

Explain the role of a constitution, and understand the concept of constitutionalism.

Discuss the general type of political system and important constitutional issues in the TIC cases.

Categorize each TIC case as having either a unitary or a federal system.

Political Institutions

Regime (Political System) Types Democracy

Selection of government officials through free and fair elections

The balance of majority rule and minority protection

Limitations on government action Variants of democracy

Majoritarian, consensus European, Westminster, American and Latin

American models

Political Institutions

Regime (Political System) Types Totalitarianism

Seeks the atomization of society (Arendt) Emphasizes mass mobilization Official ideology Single political party Reliance on terror to maintain order Control of communications Control over the means of force in society Command economy

Look at the list of criteria associated with free and fair elections. How do American elections measure up based on these criteria?

Political Institutions

Regime (Political System) Types Authoritarianism

Presence of a dominant leader or small group of leaders

Limited political participation Degree of autonomy of society from state control Lack of ideology Limited control over the economy Variants of authoritarianism

Military, party, bureaucratic

Political Institutions

Regime (Political System) Types Semiauthoritarianism/Semidemocracy

Democracy is incorporated into an otherwise authoritarian system

• Rule of Law □ A constitution add legitimacy to a system

• Constitutionalism □ A central concept in the U.S. and other democracies

• Constitutions are designed to limit the power of government

• Government officials must follow the laws of the land • Upholding these limitations and following these laws is a

key source of legitimacy

Is the U.S. Constitution really as vague Is the U.S. Constitution really as vague as the previous discussion suggests? as the previous discussion suggests? Provide specific examples from the U.S. Provide specific examples from the U.S. Constitution to support your position.Constitution to support your position.

• Unitary versus Federal Arrangements□ Unitary: Lower levels of government have no

powers reserved to them.□ Federal: Lower levels of government share powers

with the central government or have certain powers of their own.

• Local Government□ Exists in federal and unitary systems□ Oversees “day-to-day” municipal governing

• Devolving Government Powers from Central Governments to Lower Levels

Topic in Countries

The United Kingdom “Westminster democracy,” highly majoritarian Constitution is not in a single written document; a

collection of acts, legal opinions, and customs Despite significant devolution of powers to regions,

remains a unitary state

■ Veto Points□ Individuals or collective political bodies whose

failure to accept a policy change results in the rejection of the proposed change

□ Parliamentary systems generally have fewer veto points than do presidential systems (see Chapter 6), and unicameral (single-chamber) legislatures have fewer veto points than bicameral ones

□ Thatcher took advantage by making significant social welfare policy changes

Topic in Countries

Germany Consensus democracy; combination of coalition

governments, federalism, and corporatism The constitution (Basic Law) lays out both social

welfare protections and limits on government “Cooperative federalism” with significant powers for

the Länder

Topic in Countries

India Parliamentary democracy; system has evolved from

one-party dominant to multiparty Constitution is long, detailed, and heavily amended;

federal system with strong central government Federal system (28 federal units), but the central

government has strong powers; three levels of government

Topic in Countries

Mexico Party-authoritarian system until recently; today an

unconsolidated democracy Constitution originally written in 1917; prohibits the

president and legislators from running for reelection; provides for checks and balances that became important when PRI lost its dominance

Federal system with 31 federal units (estados) and one federal district; estados dependent on central government for revenue

• “Old Institutionalism” in political science had focused on describing institutions

• The behavioralism movement that began in the 1950s focused on explaining political outcomes□ David Easton proposed that all political systems

translate inputs (demands and supports) into outputs (policy)

□ The system responds to changes in supports and demands

□ Easton’s model pays little attention to the design of the institutions themselves

• Mexico and Easton’s Approach□ In the latter part of the twentieth century, changes

in demands and supports put pressure on the government of Mexico

□ Resulted in policy changes, including the political liberalization of the 1970s-1990s

□ Even without looking “inside” the Mexican system, Easton’s framework helps explain the changes that led to the PRI losing its dominance over Mexican politics

Topic in Countries

Brazil Has alternated between democracy and military

authoritarianism; remains an unconsolidated democracy with traditional elites maintaining significant power

Current constitution written in 1988; enshrined privileges for the outgoing military government

Federal system with 26 federal units (estados); more power for lower levels than in Mexico; preserves power of local elites

Topic in Countries

Nigeria Combination of majoritarian and consensus democracy;

has alternated between democracy and military authoritarianism; democratic status is increasingly unclear

Most recent constitution written in 1999; emphasis on the need for unity in a country with prevalent identity and political divisions since independence

Formerly an ethno-federal system; now more of an American-style federal system; provides a certain degree of cross-cutting identities among the otherwise complementary identity divisions

Topic in Countries

Russia Democratic following collapse of USSR; creeping

authoritarianism; semiauthoritarian system today New constitution since December 1993; Putin not

seeking third term gave some legitimacy to the constitution in an otherwise increasingly authoritarian system

Federal system; since Putin came to power, central government has increased its power versus the regions (which now number 83)

Topic in Countries

China Under Mao Zedong, often considered a totalitarian

system; since Deng Xiaoping, more like a party-authoritarian system

Evidence that a constitution, even one that is somewhat followed, does not equal democracy

Unitary state with 31 regions; some devolution, but still not a federal system

• Theda Skocpol’s 1979 book set the stage for a new focus on political institutions

□ Skocpol saw state institutions as an important independent variable, not a “black box” like in Easton’s approach

□ Led to calls to “bring the state back in”

• China is a Main Case in Skocpol’s Book□ Collapse of Imperial System due to the state relying on

local leaders for military support□ Her argument has relevance today, as China relies

more and more on regional and local officials

Topic in Countries

Iran Theocracy; under former President Khatami, attempts

at reform; under President Ahmadinejad, a return to hardline policies

Constitution after the Revolution implemented a theocracy, including the position of Supreme Leader; overhauled in 1989 (abolished prime min.)

Unitary state with 30 regions; powerful provincial leaders; central government has overseen “controlled decentralization”

• New Institutionalism□ Focuses on theories that use political institutions to

explain political outcomes□ Three main variants:

• Sociological N.I.

• Historical N.I.

• Rational Choice N.I.

• Rational Choice New Institutionalism□ Sees political institutions as the product of rational

choices by political actors□ Existing rules constrain decision makers, but they may

also try to change these arrangements

• Rational Choice N.I. and Iran□ Many in the West portray Iranian leaders as irrational

fanatics□ But, Rational Choice N.I. would see them as much

more rational, designing the rules of their theocracy to maximize the goals of maintaining power and controlling society

• Reformers versus Hardliners□ Rational Choice N.I. explains how reformers wanting to

change existing rules are constrained□ It also explains the hardliners’ use of the existing rules

to block pro-reform candidates