Intro to Comparative Politics

What aspects of a country make it more/less susceptible to leverage?

1) A states' raw size and military and economic strength. Weak states with small, underdeveloped economies are far more vulnerable to external pressure 2) the existence of competing issues on Western foreign policy agendas. As in if there are more pressing issues for a government to take on rather than government reform, it will make it harder to exert leverage. 3) governments have access to political, economic, or military support from an alternative regional power

Berman argues that absent strong and responsive political institutions, strong and active civil society can undermine rather than strengthen democracy. According to Berman, what specific institutions need to be present to mitigate such effect of civil society, and how?

A nation's political institutions must grow along with its civil society in order to avoid this. If civil society is increasing but the political instituions are frozen and dissapointing, intead of helping democracy, it can allow for opposition parties to become powerful and rally against the current poitical institution. Berman likes to think of associationism as a politically neutral multiplier: neither good nor bad and dependent on the current political situation to determine how it effects soceity.

Difference between consensual and conflicting political culture who

Almond and Verba Political cultures may be in agreement or there may be a deep divide in a country's political values. When there is a deep divide, political subcultures develop where citizens then have sharply different points of view and are exposed to different sides of politics.

parochial who

Almond and Verba hardly aware of government and politics, may be illiterate and rural, don't pay attention to politics taht don't directly impact their lives.

How do international factors matter ? who

Levitsky and Way and Huntington They can exert leverage through political conditionality and punitive sanctions, diplomatic pressure, and military intervention. They can link countries to western powers (US, EU, Western multileteral institutions) through five dimensions of ties: 1) economic linkage, which includes credit, investment, and assistance 2) geopolitical linkage, which includes ties to Western governments and Western-led alliances and organizations; 3) social linkage, which includes tourism, migration, diaspora communities, and elite education in the West 4) communication linkage, which includes cross-border telecommunications, Internet connections, and Western-media penetration; and 5) transnational civil society linkage, which includes ties to international NGOs, churches, party organizations, and other networks

Difference between liberal democracy and social democracy?

Liberal democracy advocates circumscribing the public realm as narrowly as possible 4 criteria: free elections; full adult suffrage; broad protection of civil liberties; elected govt. has real power Social democracy extends the public realm through regulation, subsidization, and sometimes collective ownership of property. Liberal conception, plus some criteria of social and economic equality Either of these two taken to extremes undermines democracy as a whole.

sturctualist approach who

Linchbach and Zuckerman *believe that both interests and identity are mediated by institutions (formal organizations of government, class relations, parties, etc) study institutions (rules of the game of politics) focuses on relations of actors study historical dynamics focused on political and social institutions by emphaszing formal institutions of government, political parties, interest groups, and use this information to make a statement on how societies and states interact. have problems with realiability for their generalizations

rationalist approach who

Linchbach and Zuckerman *study structure of material interests motivating individual and collective action focuses on the reasons of the actor perform comparative static experiments assumptions about actors who act deliberatly to maximize their advantage. uses mathematical reasoning to elaborate explainations begin at level of individual and culminates in questions about collective action have problems with realiability for their generalizations maximize abilities to provide universal laws

culturalist approach who

Linchbach and Zuckerman *there are no objective interests, your identity determines your interests, study dominant identity in a given society focuses on rules for a particular group or individual perform interpretive understandings provide nuanced and detailed readings of particular cases, hard to generalize to abstract categories or provide explainations that apply to more than one case at hand maximize importance of reliability.

What was the Pre-modern period (~5th century until 1500s the time before modern states) like?

Local personal and commercial relations define lives of people; broader ranges of authority were only vaguely defined State borders not precisely defined Armies did not represent broader authority No common legal system State building was a slow and violent process

Pure/Extreme PR vs Moderate PR

Moderate PR limits the influence of minority parties by requiring them to receive a minimum percentage of the vote in order to gain representation, I.e. 5% threshold. While extreme PR doesn't do this.

What are the theoretical approaches to explaining democratization and who founded them?

1) Cultural approach (Weber) 2. Modernization theory (Lipset) 3. Marxist approach (Moore) 4. Institutional and voluntarist approaches

What are the advantages to pesidentialism according to Mainwarning /Shugart?

1) Greater choice of voters to elect the legislative and electoral leaders 2) Greater responisbility/accountability of a directly elected president to the people. President has the pressure of trying to appeal to the people while in a parliament the voters do not always know if voting out one party will give them the change they want. Problem with not directly electing prime ministers. PMs are more concerned with keeping the legislature happy rather then the people since the legislature votes them in. 3) Although congressional independence can sometimes casue deadlock in government, it is good because it prevents ill-considered legislation from passing. It also encourages coalition building since the president is not guarenteed support in congress.

Democracy

A system of governance in which rulers are held accountable for their actions in the public realm by citizens, acting indirectly through the competition and cooperation of their elected representatives.

state legitimcy

A value whereby something or someone is recognized and accepted as right and proper; a legitimate institution or person is widely recognized and accepted by the public Legitimacy makes it easier to rule

Explain the modernization theory

All countries start poor, agricultural, non- democratic, but as they develop economically they also democratize Industrialization creates a set of changes that make democracy more likely such as 1. Urbanization more politically active people willing to fight for democracy 2. Education generates democratic values 3. Communication helps people to organize 4. Wealth large middle class less class conflict, polarization, extremism; more moderates (good for democracy) 5. More cross-cutting cleavages no single cleavage runs through the whole society more compromise/ cooperation 6. Stronger civil society easier to organize and sustain pro- democracy activities Culture is not an obstacle, but poor countries are unlikely to be democratic. So still pessimistic. Does not tell us much about states in the middle level of econ. development Presents democratization as smooth evolutionary process, but is it in reality?

What is political culture? who Difference between political culture, public opinion, and ideologies?

Almond and Verba attitudes towards the political system and its various parts, and attitudes towards the role of self in the system. There are 3 levels of a country's political culture: 1) System level: Do citizens identify with the nation and accept general form of government? 2) Process level: What do you think is expected of you as a citizen? 3) Policy level: What should be appropriate role of the government, govt. priorities? Public opinion: reflects short term outlook (changes more frequently than PC) Ideologies: a top-down, intellectual effort (while PC refers to attitudes existing within society)

subjects who

Almond and Verba passively obey government officials and the law, do not vote or take part in politics activley

participants who

Almond and Verba people who are involved in politics, vote

Sultanism

An extreme form of partrimonialism Private and public sector are fused Familial power is common Economic successs depends on personal relationships of the ruler The ruler acts only according to his own unchecked disgretion with no larger, impersonal goals. No rule of law, low institutionalization Extensive social and economic pluralism but no political pluralism No elaborate or guiding ideology Mobilization is seldom found because of the low degree of institutionaliztion and the low commitment to an overarching ideology . If there is mobilization, it has a tendency to be brought on by violemce and terror against anyone who opposes the ruler's will, which is different from authoritarian mobilization. Unpredictable personal rule.

Explain the Institutional and voluntarist approaches

Critique all three pessimistic structural approaches for: (a) being pessimistic and (b) ignoring the role of human agency Key claim: good leadership and right institutions can overcome structural hurdles (underdevelopment, "wrong" culture and class structure) Political pacts and institutional design can foster democracy by ensuring that all key players have a stake in democratic system Far-sighted leaders can help democracy take root by underutilizing power Optimistic. With the right institutions/leaders democracy can be established anywhere Problems/criticisms: Difficult to generalize, build theories based on leadership, Good institutions on paper may not lead to desired effects if undermined in practice

Explain the Marxist approach

Democratization is a product of class conflict (between bourgeoisie and landed aristocracy). Democratization takes place if the landed aristocracy is destroyed by the bourgeoisie Landed elites relies on the system of labor repressive agriculture which requires political arrangements fundamentally incompatible with democracy: repressive state and systematic denial of basic rights to peasants For democracy to emerge, the landed elite has to be physically defeated By bourgeoisie economically interested in ending laborrepressive agriculture Through violence Pessimistic. The problem is not culture or poverty but class structure (lack of bourgeoisie in much of the developing world) In much of the developing world outside Europe both bourgeoisie and landed elites are weak Moore's focus on these classes is too narrow need to look not only at classes, but at the balance of power between state and cilil society more broadly (not only between bourgeoisie and landed elites)

What are institutions by Putnam's standards?

Devices for achieving purposes, they reviece inputs from their societal environment and produce outputs to respond to that environment

Empirical vs. normative political analysis

Empiracal: newer, Emphasis on the study of hOW politics is conducted; concerned with describing and explaining political reality. Does not make value judgments; asks what is happening, how, and WHY Normative: older, Emphasis on how politics SHOULD be conducted; concerned with prescribing what political realty should be, Makes value judgments; asks what's best/worst

Parlimentary System Characteristics

Executive and legislative branches are fused HoG (PM) is NOT directly elected but elected by the legislature Divided government is impossible by definition Executive does not serve fixed term in office HoS can be a monarch or even a president, but: HoS and HoG are two separate people HoS is usually not directly elected and is not very powerful So just having a president does NOT make the system presidential! A system where the only democratically legitimate institution is parliment, and the government's authority is completely dependent on parliamentary confidence. Parliament is able to be dissolved without a regime change, many influences in political policy make it less rigid than presidential terms

Presidential System Characteristics

Executive and legislature are elected separately Govt/cabinet is appointed by president, responsible to, and can be fired by, president (not legislature) Both president and legislature have electoral mandate and distinct powers; neither one has primacy over other and can remove each other (unless extreme circumstance) possibility of divided gov excecutive term in office is fixed A system where a president with significant constitutional powers is directly ecleted by the people for a fixed term and is independent of parlimentary votes of confidence. The president is the symbolic head of the state and can only be removed through impeachment The president has a strong claim to legitimacy The legistlators can also claim legitimacy and sometimes the president and the legislation, both legitimate, can go head to head on ideas and policy A fixed term breaks the policitcal process into discontinuous, rigidly marked periods.

Lame Duck Effect

Fixed presidential term limits + unpopular president = lame duck effect = paralyzed government, political instability & crisis

Crude Institutionalism v. contextual institutionalism

Form of new institutionalism crude institutionalism: Looks only at institutions, ignores socio-economic and cultural variables contextual institutionalism: Sees institutions as intervening variables mediating the effects of fundamental economic and social forces

Competitive authoritarianism

Formal democratic institutions are widely viewed as the principal means of obtaining and exercising political authority. However, incumbents violate these rules so often and to such an extent that the regime goals to meet conventional minimum standards for democracy. While democracy meets 4 minimum criteria (1) executives and legislatures are chosen in elections that are open, free, and fair 2) virtually all adults have the right to vote 3) political rights and civil liberties are broadly protected 4) elected authorities possess real authority to govern) they may impede it at times but it doesn't fundamentally change the playing field between government and opposition in a serious way. Authoritarianism violates these criteria frequently enough to create an uneven playing now field. However, competitive authoritarianism may routinely manipulate formal democratic rules, but they are unable to eliminate them or reduce them to a mere facade. Regions with linkages the west are more likely to be competitve authoritarian rather than authoritarian becuase western form of cultural and media influence, elite networks, demonstartion effects, and direct pressure from western governements have raised the cost of authoritarian entrenchment, making the democratization of competitive authroitarian regimes more likely.

State v. Regime v. Government

Government: the leadership in charge of running the state Least lasting Regime: fundamental norms and rules of politics ( such as democracy/non- democracy, etc) State: territory itself plus a set of political institutions that establish order and carry out policies Most lasting

Explain the cultural approach.

Has Liberalism (classical liberalism) as the foundation for modern democracy 1. Champions individual rights mistrusts anyone with power to take these rights away unwilling to grant unlimited/unchecked authority to rulers 2. Political egalitarianism equal before the law 3. Encourages competition and choice right to chose among candidates for political office Pessimistic expectations for democracy outside the west --> Democracy unlikely to succeed in societies with "wrong" culture Static approach, cannot explain change

Post-Totalitarian Regime Characteristics

Has a much more significant degree of social and economic pluralism than in totalitarian regimes but less than authoritarian regimes. The pluralism must arise out of a previous totalitarian regime. There is an active effort at detotalitarianization on the part of oppositional currents of society. There is a limit on pluralism. Leaders are unconstrained by laws and procedures and is often buerocratic and state-technocratic rather than charismatic. Leaders recruited from structures created by the regime. Important ideology legacy left over from totalitarianism but also faces reality and becomes more critical. Dissipating mobilization The emergence of post-totalitarinism is brought on by 1) deliberate policies of the rulers to soften or reform the totalitarin system 2) the internal "hollowing out" of the totalitarian regime's structures and the internal erosion of the cadre's ideological beliefs and 3) the developent of social, cultural, and even economic spaces that resist or escape totalitarian control. Unlike other regimes, post-totalitarianism does not arise out of genetic legitimacy, rather they emerge out of routinization, making them weak.

Authoritarian Regime Characteristics

Has some political pluralism and extensive economic and social pluralism. Has an autonomous private sector, somewhat greater religious freedom, and a greater amount of above ground cultural production. There is no limit on pluralism Leadership is characterized by a formally ill-defined but quite predictable political system Leaders found from groups that have some power and leadership but are not necessarily from the regime No legacy of ideology, faces reality. No mobilization

What does Lipset think about presidentialism vs presidentialism?

He thinks that the argument that presidentialism gives too much power to one person is flawed since a prime minister with a majority of parliament behind him has more power than a president and doesn't need to think about the opposing minority party when passing legislature. He also believes that the reason presidentialism hasn't been too stable in Latin American countries is because of their culture and economies, not because of the system of government.

Why does war increase tax efficiency? who

Herbst 1) War forces rulers to gain capital fast, so they must adress this and find ways to generate more revanue 2) People are more likely to pay higher taxes during a war

How does war affect state consolidation? who

Herbst War gets rid of the weaker states with political arrangements that are not viable. War forces countries to be able to collect taxes efficiently and effectively or else they loose the war. Countries in peace are not forced to do this and thus cannot progress as fast War increases nationalism *war lords who were best able to generate revenue build powerful armies won wars expanded territory collected more taxes further enhanced their war making capacity Over several centuries a few most successful warlords became kings of England, France, Sweden etc

How can one strengthen a weak state? who

Herbst and Rotberg Creating a security force Recreation of an administrative structure Reestablishment of a legitimate legal code Restarting the schools and creating infrastucture Preventing state failure is imperative and costly, much harder to fix an already broken state; however this maintenence of weak states is up to big established states

state size

How much does the state want to do? The extent of state role in economy and society - how much does the state seek to regulate?

Relationship between institutional design and institutional strength?

If institutions are weak and regularly circumvented, what they are (and how they are design) may ultimately not matter Institutional strength can be measured along two dimensions: stability and enforcement

What happens to states with leverage without linkage?

It makes full-scale authoritarianism more difficult to sustain but does not promote democracy (i.e. Sub-Saharan Africa)

Labor Repressive Agriculture

Landed elites relies on this which requires political arrangements fundamentally incompatible with democracy: repressive state and systematic denial of basic rights to peasants For democracy to emerge, the landed elite has to be physically defeated

What is competitive authoritarianism? Who?

Levitsky and Way These are civilian regimes in which democratic institutions exist and permit meaningful competition for power, but where the political playing field is so heavily tilted in favor of incumbents that the regime cannot be labeled democratic.

What is the Modern period (since 1800s the rise of nation-state system) like?

Modern state exists by this period, but modern nations do not yet exist Until 19th century, the nation was an elite (not mass) concept Formation of mass nations and nation-states Increased trade and mobility cultural homogenization of people on state territory though printed documents, education, legal codes Printing press, mass education standardization of language Large wars between states generate association between population and the state (common symbols, memory, patriotism etc); rulers exploit nationalism to mobilize population to fight in wars End result: the nation becomes a mass concept; mass citizenship emerges; states become nation-states

What was the Early modern period (1500s-1800s the rise of the modern state system) like?

Modern states emerged by the early modern period, and further strengthened during this period Economic and scientific progress in Europe Need for people and goods to quickly move across large territories Warfare become more costly Rulers need more revenues from subjects 1648 Peace of Westphalia End result: modern state strengthens and spreads Modern state proved to be an institution best able to ensure economic development and military success

Quantatative (large n)

More cases • Use of statistics • Breadth over depth Limitations: • Data availability/reliability • Some concepts (culture, identity) are hard to quantify • Some important events are few in numbers (revolutions, major wars)

What causes/affects redistribution in advanced democracies according to Iversen and Soskice?

More inequality leads to more redistribution. Higher voter turnout means less distribution since low voter turnout usually indicates a significant poor population. Unemployment leads to more redistribution Females in the labor force means more redistribution since females usually get paid less than males. All in all, redistribution depends on electoral systems and the class coalitions they engender.

Proportional Representation

Multiparty systems, coalition governments, and more equal executive-legislature power relations. A consensus model of democracy which tried to limit, divide, separate, and share power in a variety of ways. Gives minority parties a say, prevents ethnic conflict Focus on representation

Totalitarian Regime Characteristics

No political, economic, or social pluralism and all pre-existing sources of pluralism have been uprooted or repressed. Leaders are unconstrained by laws and procedures and is often charismatic. Strong faith in ideology High mobilization of people into regime-created organizations and activities.

What do insitutions do and how? who

North Institutions reduce uncertainty and transaction costs in an economic exchange, and thus facilitate economic activity Political institutions shape the way the game of politics is conducted. They do so in 5 ways: 1. Define who can and cannot play the game 2. Influence who wins and loses 3. Affects who gets what (distribution of power and resources in society) 4. Shape incentives and strategies of political actors 5. May even shape people's identity and culture

Institutionalization who

North first and Putnam Humanly devised constraints that structure political, economic, and social interaction. They consist of both formal and informal rules. Institutions emerged in order to create order and reduce uncertainty in exchange Process by which organizations and procedures acuire validity and stability Level of institutionalizaiton can be defined by adaptability, complexity, autonomy, and coherence. Can be narrow or broad, can be easy to change or deeply entrenched. Putnam Devices for achieving purposes, they reviece inputs from their societal environment and produce outputs to respond to that environment

Old Institutionalism v New Institutionalism

Old focuses more on describing aspects and characteristics of institutions while new focuses more on effects of institutions on political behavior and political outcomes

Competitive authroitarian judicial?

Regimes routinley attempt to subordinate the judiciary. However, punishing judges that rule against them may generate important costs in terms of domestic and international legitimacy.

Dutch disease who

Ross The main idea is that if a country gets large inflow of foreign currency (as happens if it strikes oil or some other natural commodity it can export), this increases the value of the national currency, making other products the country produces more costly and thus less competitive on international markets, which also makes these other industries less of a priority and thus less developed. And when the commodities run out, there will be little left to sustain an economy, so this is why it's considered bad (disease). The Dutch disease can be considered an element of the broader "resource curse" problem which refers to the paradox of countries rich in natural resources growing more slowly/failing to develop relative to countries without such natural wealth.

What are the markers of a failed state? who

Rotberg Civil wars, violence against the government Failed states stop providing political goods (security, education, health services, legal framework, etc) and give this responsibility to warlords or terrorists. Weak or flawed institutions Deteriorating or destroyed infrastructure Unparalleled economic opportunity When it looses basic legitimacy Low GDP

Difference between weak and failed states who

Rotberg Weak states have some markers of a failed state Failed states are casued by man and bad rulers, have most if not all of the markers.

Why are third wave democracies (democracies that have sprung up since 1974) different from older democracies? who

Schmitter and Karl These new democracies live in "compressed time". They cannot expect to acquire gradual channels of representation in gradual historical progression as did most of their predecessors. Instead they will have to deal with a bewildering array of groups and parities that want change and influence all at once.

Why is presidentialism weaker? who

Shuguard and Mainwaring??? Stable parliamentary democracies tend to be small, wealthy, and/or have UK colonial heritage Unstable presidential democracies tend to be poor, polarized, and/or have weak democratic traditions Stable presidential democracies have a two party system, So perhaps not presidentialism per se is a problem, but presidentialism in combination with a multiparty system?

What is state autonomy? Is it always desireable? who

Skocpol It is when the state acts with its own interests in mind and is not pursuing goals refelctive of interests groups, classes, or society. It is not a fixed part of any state system. It is not always desirable, it is good for the state when it makes foreign policy decisions that help the state as a whole instead of corperations, however other autonomus state activity may help the state but be hard on the people, like agricultural reform. The state might also not know as much as groups do, as with transportation, and need their opinion to operate effectivley. US doesn't have too much state autonomy because many people/groups have a say in decision making. *Ability of states to formulate and pursue goals independent of public and narrow particularistic interests (e.g. classes, social groups, society in general) What's positive about high autonomy? The state is not captured by narrow groups, can act in the interests of society as a whole What's negative? Highly autonomous state does not listen to the society (undemocratic)

society centered apporach vs. state centered approach to autonomy who

Skocpol Society-centered approach: State is DV (not autonomous) State-centered approach: State is IV (autonomous), more recent approach

How are state autonomy and state capacity related? who

Skocpol State autonomy is when a state acts on its own interests without reflecting on other groups. However, state capacity allows the state to make its own decisions or not. A state has to have the ability/capacity to make its own decision. A state must have capacity in order to have autonomy. States must take into account their resources and situational advantages to non-state actors in order to see whether or not they are capable of acting on their own autonomy. Capacity is ability to realize its own goals.

state soverignty

State's ability to carry actions within its borders independently of external rivals and authorities

state strength (capacity/effectiveness)

State's ability to realize its goals; ability to do what it sets out to do E.g. provide security to citizens, education, get people to pay taxes and obey the law, etc

strongly institutionalized party systems vs weakly institutionalized party systems

Strong: Enduring parties, with deep roots in society, viewed by voters and politicians as permanent fixtures of society Voters have strong party identification, often passed from generation to generation Politicians spend entire career within a single party Electoral results are fairly stable from election to election Weak: Parties barely exist, not well organized, no roots in society Parties are numerous, personalistic, and short-lived Few people belong to a party, party ID weak and fluid High electoral volatility from election to election

Structural vs. Volunteerist theories?

Structural theories: Focus on features of society as a whole (includes cultural theories) Voluntarist theories: Focus on individual actors/leaders

1648 Peace of Westphalia

The Pope no longer the highest political authority

Falsifiability (Falsifiable hypothesis/theory)

The only type of hypothesis or theory that can be tested empirically.

Duverger's law

The simple-majority single-ballot system favors the two-party system. Happens becuase of mechanical reasons (under-representation of the third) and psycological reasons ( wasting their vote) of the voter. Moderates get representation and radicals on the fringe don't get represented.

correlation

a relationship where 2 or more variables change together positively correlated when they vary in the same direction inverseley/negetive correlated when they vary in opposite directions correlations are not explainations correlations do not exclusively demonstrate causality, only suggests a cause and effect relationship. Showing a correlation is key to suggesting causality but by itself does not show causality

parsimonious theory

a theory that expplains a vast range of phenomina in succient terms

intervening variable

between independent and dependent variables intermediary factors that give a bigger picture to why the dependent variable acted the way it did

Method of agreement

chose different cases that experienced similar outcome look for similarities among them

Method of difference

chose similar cases that experienced different outcomes look for differences between them

rational choice theory

explains political behavior by reguarding all individuals as rational actors who seek to maximize personal gains and minimize losses

Divided government

possible negetive side effect of presidentialism when president lacks majority in legislature permanent executive/legislative conflict, ineffective govt, severe institutional crisis democratic rule jeopardized

Totalitarian Regimes

seek to control and transform all aspects of society, state, and economy (i.e., total control) Features (Linz and Stepan) 1. Strongly ideological ; articulates a reachable utopia 2. Extensive mobilization efforts aimed at society 3. Charismatic leadership/also cult of personality 4. No economic, social, or political pluralism 5. ALSO most widely use terror & violence Totalitarian regimes are rare

dependent variable

the main object of the study, it is the effected outcome of the independent variable

independent variable

the variable that casues a change in the dependent variable

spurious correlation

when upon further investigation it is discovered that there is no direct cause and effect relationship between a correltaion, either just pure coincidence or a something else is causing these two patterns independently

Qualitative (small n)

• Fewer cases • Attention to history, local context, etc. • Depth over breadth Limitations: • Hard to generalize to other cases

Majoritarian / Westminster model

Countries that use a plurality method of election with likely a two party system, and one party government, and are dominant in relation to their legislatures. Power is concentrated in the hands of the majority party. Many view this is the only way that government policy can effectively be achieved Focus on capacity to govern

Civil Society

a realm of organized citizen activity that's autonomous (i.e. independent) of the state

How does one get civil society? who

Putnam Civil society is a product of history

What is wrong with Linz argument against presidentialism according to Mainwarning /Shugart?

1) Parliment also has a winner take all policy; if a majority of the seats go to a party taht receives less than 50% of the vote, then that party rules both the executive and the lesilative unchecked and representing less than half of the people. Presidentialism has checks and balances that inhibit the winner take all policy. Also, a president usually needs a coalition of parties to get elected, so he appoints members of other parties to cabinets giving them a piece of the pie AND the president must appeal to all these coalitions to gian their support. 2) Places like Latin America and parts of Africa that have presidential democracy have had to overcome many obstacles, despite the type of government it has currently, making it inherently unstable while countries with parliaments have conditions more favorable to democracy.

Why is parliment more stable than president according to Linz?

1) The president and the excecutive both have competing claims to legitimacy. Both are polularly elected and may come into conflict with no easy way to resolve it. Parliament doesn't have this problem because the excecutive is not independent of the legislative; if a majority wants a change, they can always put through a vote of no confidence. 2) the fixed term of the president's office introduces a rigidity that is less favorable to democracy than the flexibility offered by parliamentary systems, where governments depend on the ongoing confidence of the assembly. By virtue of their greater ability to promote changes in the cabinet and government, parliamentary systems afford greater opportunities to resolve disputes. Such a safety valve may enhance regime stability. If there is an unpopular president wiht a fixed term = lame duck effect where the government is frozen 3) Presidential systems have a zero sum game while parliament is likely to form coalitions 4) For the president, the sense of being the representative of the entire nation may lead the president to be intolerant of the opposition 5) Political outsiders are more likely to win the chief executive office in presidential systems

What are the 3 paths to competitive authoritarianism?

1) decay of a full blown authoritarian regime (usually becuase of a combination of domestic and international pressure). Yet due to the weakness of opposition movements, the transition fell shor tof democracy. 2) Collapse of an authoritarian regime followed by the emergence of a new, competitive authroitarian regime. 3) decay of a democratic regime, either through a presidential coup or seletive, incrimental abuses

How does linkage affect authoritarianism?

1) heightening the salience in the West of authoritarian government abuse; 2) increasing the probability of an international response; 3) creating domestic constituencies with a stake in adhering to democratic norms; 4) strengthening democratic forces in relation to autocrats. Linkage, unlike leverage, is a source of soft power Linkage is a strutural variable (product of history, geography, etc) and it is hard to manipulate with short term foreign policy manipulation

Relationship between autocratic governments and democracy?

Authoritarian gov may exist indefinatley with meaningful democratic institutions as long as incumbents avoid well-publicized rights abuses or openly steal elections. However, coexistance of democratic rules and autocratic methods aimed at keeping incumbents in power creates an inherent source of instability.

Authoritarian & competitive authroitarian legislation?

Authoritarian: Legislatures either do not exist or are so controlled by the ruling party that conflict between the legislative and the executive is virtually unthinkable. Competitive authroitarian: Legislative is weak but can occassionally become a focal point of opposition activity.

Authoritarian & competitive authroitarian media?

Authoritarian: Media is entierly state-owned, heavily censored, and systematically repressed. Journalists who provoke the government risk arrest, deportation, and assasination. Competitive authoritarianism: Independent media outlets are not legal but often quite influencial, and journalists often emerge as important opposition figures. Efforts to supress the media can be costly

Authoritarian & competitive authroitarian elections?

Authoritarian: Opposition fores to not present serious eletoral threats to incumbents, noncompetitive. Competitive authoritarian: Competitive, bitterly fought, may contain abuses of state power, biased media coverage, harrasment of candidates, and lack of transparency, but they are generally free of massive fraud.

amoral familism who

Banfield civic community vs uncivic community Caused by three factors acting in combination: 1) high death rate 2) certain land tenure conditions 3) the absence of the institution of the extended family A society having some of the qualities of amoral familism is decisively different than societies having ALL the qualities. It is a matter of degree, and no matter how selfish or unscrupulous a society may be, it is not amorally familialistic of there is some sense of public spiritedness or enlightened self interest. Organization is very difficult to achieve and creates a society of selfish untrusting people. To be a part of an organization means that you are unselfish and trust others to commit their time in an unselfish manner as well. Lack of organizations and trust mean that people are only able to care about their immediate family and that caring about anything further than the family would be a waste of time since no one else cares either. It is a consensus that people will look out for themsleves. Absense of organization retards economic development in a nation. Democratic development cannot occur in poor societies because poor societies lack structure and are filled with corruption. Those societies just want protection, which is offerend by governemental sturctures such as fascism that operate with a strong hand. Democracy, where everyone is represented does not seem plausible or possible in a selfish amoral society with no trust. Very short-term thinkers Putnam Southern Italy has amoral familialism

Semi-Presidential Systems

President (HoS) and PM (HoG) are separate people, both have real power President is directly elected for a fixed term Legislature is elected separately, and PM is elected by the legislature - NOT appointed by president as in presidential systems!! PM can also be removed by the legislature Possibility of "cohabitation" (If there are both president and PM, but president is clearly more powerful and can appoint of remove PM, then this is presidential, not semi-presidential system)

What is social capital? who?

Putnam Features of social organization, such as trust, norms and networks, that can prove efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions, normally a public good, increase with use and diminsish with disuse. Trust is an essential component of socail capital

What does __who____ mean by there is a collective action problem in southern italy?

Putnam everyone will be better off if everyone cooperated, but each individual has incentive not to cooperate CAP is related to the levels of interpersonal trust civic community vs amoral familialism

Social capital who

Putnam features of social organizations, such as trust, norms of reciprocity and networks of civic engagement that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated action. Once dynamics of reciprocity and cooperation is established (social capital), it becomes self-enforcing (virtuous circle)

legal state legitimacy who

Weber legitimacy through a belief in the validity of legal statute based on rationally created rules. like an elected president

charismatic state legitimacy who

Weber legitimacy through absolutley personal devotion and personal confidence in revelation, heroism *Relies on the force of ideas and the presence of the leader like a revolutionary leader

traditional state legitimacy who

Weber legitimacy through tradition and habitual orientation *Relies on habit, custom, tradition. Something is legitimate because "it has always been this way" like a monarch

Cohabitation

When legislature is controlled by party or coalition different from the president's party, PM and president are from 2 different parties, occurs in semi-presidential systems

Electoralism

When some consider the mere fact of elections-- even ones from which specific parties or candidates are excluded, or in which substantial portions of the population cannot freely participate-- as a sufficient condition for the existence of democracy.