POL326Y1 Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Comparative Politics, Ruling Class, Dependent And Independent Variables
7 views12 pages
WWII
§
War the result of individuals hell bent on making war, expanding territories, etc.
o
Pluralist tradition – democratic peace theory
•
Certain types more prone to war than others
§
Nature of states determine inevitability of war
o
A system characterized by anarchy – there is no higher authority to which individual states can appeal to protect their interests
§
Usually military, but all intertwined.
•
States responsible for their own security – only able to do that by amassing more power
§
Imbalances in those systems make war inevitable.
§
International system best explains the emergence of wars
o
Kenneth Waltz: 3 images that explain war
•
Realist = no prospect for a world government
§
Because anarchy at level of international system is understood to be permanent.
o
Was very unique in that it was a rare occurrence.
§
Waltz wrote at time of international bi-polarity
o
Allow for alliances
§
Some consider a multi-polar system to be more stable
o
Ex: Cold War
•
Imbalances between two poles encourages taking advantage of superiority to weaken their adversary
§
Bi-polar system only has two poles
o
Bi-polarity ended with the falling of the Berlin wall and the end of the Cold War
o
Turned into a unipolar system which is different
o
Waltz’ third image the most important in explaining war
•
War of choice is inherently irrational
o
States are rational because they are disciplined by the international system.
o
States that remain in the international system are those that are relatively rational.
o
States are rational actors – not because they consist of rational people, but rather because they do not have the luxury to indulge in irrational acts.
•
Spent an enormous amount of wealth and military hardware than it had on any other war.
§
Despite all of that it ultimately lost the war.
§
Went into the war because of the “domino” theory.
§
Ex: intervention in Vietnam War – considered to be an act of irrationality
o
US foreign policy has some substantial problems in terms of rationality.
•
Always have to take actions on incomplete information in international relations.
•
Ex: Intervention in Iraq
§
US faced no threat and faced no need to engage in conflict but did anyways
o
“In the absence of threat, policy becomes capricious” – Waltz
o
therefore not nature of states but nature of the international system
o
Post Cold-War period
•
Individuals are not particularly important in shaping the activities of states.
o
Current environment had to be revised
•
In the absences of a major adversary, the US defined the nature of the international system.
•
US becomes crucial factor in the international system.
•
Mid Term
6 key terms to identify
•
dealing with broader themes of the course.
o
2 essay questions of which you will answer 1
•
Format for the final will be more or less the same as mid-term
•
Research Paper
No suggested research topics – choose your own topic
•
Research topic, research question, tentative hypothesis
o
Will provide opportunity to submit a research proposal – no more than 250 words
•
DUE OCTOBER 30th
•
Lecture
In the realm of comparative politics, those definitions are in keeping with the definitions argued in the textbook
o
Determines who is rewarded and who is not rewarded
•
Depending on what is in high demand on the market and what is not in high demand
•
Allocation can be done through command – some allocation is absolutely necessary.
•
Who pays taxes, who serves in the military, etc.
•
Politics is about command
•
Politics is about allocation
§
Who gets what when where and how
o
The definitions that prevail of the core subject matter is somewhat different than the understanding of those concepts in the realm of international relations
•
Political commands have unique feature of being enforceable against the will of those being commanded
•
What happens in legislature – and policy is made by pitting interests against each other through legislative systems
o
Politics takes place within societies
•
Politics is first and foremost and almost exclusively, not about who gets what when where and how within society but basic dichotomy of us vs. the other – friend vs. foe.
§
Every state has to be able to decide what other societies’ states they can peacefully coexist with and which they cannot.
§
Keep at bay the threat of order that is always imposed by other societies.
§
Carl Schmidt: The Concept of Political
o
International policy takes precedence over domestic policy.
o
In international relations politics is understood in a different manner
•
That government governs best by governing least
§
US constitution the output of that concept.
•
Make process of governing as inefficient as it could be
§
However, the American political system is geared towards lassie fair
o
Constitutional design was to protect minorities.
o
American foreign policy primarily concerned with security and survival.
•
The most important component is efficiency – government has to be efficient in order to address threats as quickly as possible.
•
It was always free from external threat – had a giant moat protecting itself from other powers.
o
While that protection allowed US to put national defense on the back burner – changed in the 20th century.
o
US emerged as a power under very unusual circumstances
•
States are crucial component of analysis – understanding what the state is will allow us to engage what foreign policy actually signifies.
o
Substantial disagreement about the nature of states – what states actually are
•
More important is outcome of competition between various groups to influence the state
§
Dependent variable = state not an actor but the thing being acted upon.
o
State is neutral arena in which competition take place. The outcome of which determine policy.
o
Understanding policy = looking at various forces that act on the state.
o
Foreign policy is simply an outgrowth of domestic policy.
o
Karl Marx.
§
Ruling class rules – even in a democracy, the capitalists rule
o
Liberals and pluralists see the state as a dependent variable
•
On a regular basis they trade places
o
In many cases they move from the corporate world to government service
o
Not too surprising that government acts in the interest of those dominant elites
o
Stuck between demands of accumulation, and demands of legitimation – that gap provides the state with relative autonomy.
•
Scope of that freedom to move is seriously limited.
•
Derives from keeping the economy flowing and does so by instituting policies that benefit the main economic actors, but at the same time in democratic context, if state were on
a regular basis exclusively to side with corporate interests, becomes difficult to sustain in keeping support of 99%
§
Instrumentalist view
§
State at best has relative autonomy.
o
Revolving door relationship between elites
•
Class conscious ruling class – assumption that all ruling elites share the same interest
§
No such thing as a “ruling class” – capitalists might have certain things in common, but they have separate interests – so they do not all share the same basic interests.
§
There is no reason to assume that the ruling class is one unit and are all the same.
§
Have a problem with the idea of the dependent variable – argued that it suffered from substantial problems
o
Not to defend capitalists, but to maintain long-term stability of the capitalist system as a whole.
§
Ex: 1930s, capital system faced deep deep crisis that was overcome by Roosevelt’s New Deal (welfare state, minimum wage, social security) based on taxing corporations to
create these programs for the poor.
§
The reason the state acts in the interest of capital has nothing to do with personal relationship
o
They are focused on their own ability to make profit.
§
Cannot explain that on the intervention of capitalists – they fought it tooth and nail
o
Maintaining the ability of companies as a whole to make profits.
o
The ruling class does not rule
o
Extensive ties between rulers of the states and rulers of the corporate world.
o
This relationship is a form of corruption that keeps the state from performing the role it is supposed to.
o
Structuralists
•
Lecture 1: Sept. 11
WWII
§
War the result of individuals hell bent on making war, expanding territories, etc.
o
Pluralist tradition – democratic peace theory
•
Certain types more prone to war than others
§
Nature of states determine inevitability of war
o
A system characterized by anarchy – there is no higher authority to which individual states can appeal to protect their interests
§
Usually military, but all intertwined.
•
States responsible for their own security – only able to do that by amassing more power
§
Imbalances in those systems make war inevitable.
§
International system best explains the emergence of wars
o
Kenneth Waltz: 3 images that explain war
•
Realist = no prospect for a world government
§
Because anarchy at level of international system is understood to be permanent.
o
Was very unique in that it was a rare occurrence.
§
Waltz wrote at time of international bi-polarity
o
Allow for alliances
§
Some consider a multi-polar system to be more stable
o
Ex: Cold War
•
Imbalances between two poles encourages taking advantage of superiority to weaken their adversary
§
Bi-polar system only has two poles
o
Bi-polarity ended with the falling of the Berlin wall and the end of the Cold War
o
Turned into a unipolar system which is different
o
Waltz’ third image the most important in explaining war
•
War of choice is inherently irrational
o
States are rational because they are disciplined by the international system.
o
States that remain in the international system are those that are relatively rational.
o
States are rational actors – not because they consist of rational people, but rather because they do not have the luxury to indulge in irrational acts.
•
Spent an enormous amount of wealth and military hardware than it had on any other war.
§
Despite all of that it ultimately lost the war.
§
Went into the war because of the “domino” theory.
§
Ex: intervention in Vietnam War – considered to be an act of irrationality
o
US foreign policy has some substantial problems in terms of rationality.
•
Always have to take actions on incomplete information in international relations.
•
Ex: Intervention in Iraq
§
US faced no threat and faced no need to engage in conflict but did anyways
o
“In the absence of threat, policy becomes capricious” – Waltz
o
therefore not nature of states but nature of the international system
o
Post Cold-War period
•
Individuals are not particularly important in shaping the activities of states.
o
Current environment had to be revised
•
In the absences of a major adversary, the US defined the nature of the international system.
•
US becomes crucial factor in the international system.
•
Mid Term
6 key terms to identify
•
dealing with broader themes of the course.
o
2 essay questions of which you will answer 1
•
Format for the final will be more or less the same as mid-term
•
Research Paper
No suggested research topics – choose your own topic
•
Research topic, research question, tentative hypothesis
o
Will provide opportunity to submit a research proposal – no more than 250 words
•
DUE OCTOBER 30th
•
Lecture
In the realm of comparative politics, those definitions are in keeping with the definitions argued in the textbook
o
Determines who is rewarded and who is not rewarded
•
Depending on what is in high demand on the market and what is not in high demand
•
Allocation can be done through command – some allocation is absolutely necessary.
•
Who pays taxes, who serves in the military, etc.
•
Politics is about command
•
Politics is about allocation
§
Who gets what when where and how
o
The definitions that prevail of the core subject matter is somewhat different than the understanding of those concepts in the realm of international relations
•
Political commands have unique feature of being enforceable against the will of those being commanded
•
What happens in legislature – and policy is made by pitting interests against each other through legislative systems
o
Politics takes place within societies
•
Politics is first and foremost and almost exclusively, not about who gets what when where and how within society but basic dichotomy of us vs. the other – friend vs. foe.
§
Every state has to be able to decide what other societies’ states they can peacefully coexist with and which they cannot.
§
Keep at bay the threat of order that is always imposed by other societies.
§
Carl Schmidt: The Concept of Political
o
International policy takes precedence over domestic policy.
o
In international relations politics is understood in a different manner
•
That government governs best by governing least
§
US constitution the output of that concept.
•
Make process of governing as inefficient as it could be
§
However, the American political system is geared towards lassie fair
o
Constitutional design was to protect minorities.
o
American foreign policy primarily concerned with security and survival.
•
The most important component is efficiency – government has to be efficient in order to address threats as quickly as possible.
•
It was always free from external threat – had a giant moat protecting itself from other powers.
o
While that protection allowed US to put national defense on the back burner – changed in the 20th century.
o
US emerged as a power under very unusual circumstances
•
States are crucial component of analysis – understanding what the state is will allow us to engage what foreign policy actually signifies.
o
Substantial disagreement about the nature of states – what states actually are
•
More important is outcome of competition between various groups to influence the state
§
Dependent variable = state not an actor but the thing being acted upon.
o
State is neutral arena in which competition take place. The outcome of which determine policy.
o
Understanding policy = looking at various forces that act on the state.
o
Foreign policy is simply an outgrowth of domestic policy.
o
Karl Marx.
§
Ruling class rules – even in a democracy, the capitalists rule
o
Liberals and pluralists see the state as a dependent variable
•
On a regular basis they trade places
o
In many cases they move from the corporate world to government service
o
Not too surprising that government acts in the interest of those dominant elites
o
Stuck between demands of accumulation, and demands of legitimation – that gap provides the state with relative autonomy.
•
Scope of that freedom to move is seriously limited.
•
Derives from keeping the economy flowing and does so by instituting policies that benefit the main economic actors, but at the same time in democratic context, if state were on
a regular basis exclusively to side with corporate interests, becomes difficult to sustain in keeping support of 99%
§
Instrumentalist view
§
State at best has relative autonomy.
o
Revolving door relationship between elites
•
Class conscious ruling class – assumption that all ruling elites share the same interest
§
No such thing as a “ruling class” – capitalists might have certain things in common, but they have separate interests – so they do not all share the same basic interests.
§
There is no reason to assume that the ruling class is one unit and are all the same.
§
Have a problem with the idea of the dependent variable – argued that it suffered from substantial problems
o
Not to defend capitalists, but to maintain long-term stability of the capitalist system as a whole.
§
Ex: 1930s, capital system faced deep deep crisis that was overcome by Roosevelt’s New Deal (welfare state, minimum wage, social security) based on taxing corporations to
create these programs for the poor.
§
The reason the state acts in the interest of capital has nothing to do with personal relationship
o
They are focused on their own ability to make profit.
§
Cannot explain that on the intervention of capitalists – they fought it tooth and nail
o
Maintaining the ability of companies as a whole to make profits.
o
The ruling class does not rule
o
Extensive ties between rulers of the states and rulers of the corporate world.
o
This relationship is a form of corruption that keeps the state from performing the role it is supposed to.
o
Structuralists
•
Lecture 1: Sept. 11
WWII
§
War the result of individuals hell bent on making war, expanding territories, etc.
o
Pluralist tradition – democratic peace theory
•
Certain types more prone to war than others
§
Nature of states determine inevitability of war
o
A system characterized by anarchy – there is no higher authority to which individual states can appeal to protect their interests
§
Usually military, but all intertwined.
•
States responsible for their own security – only able to do that by amassing more power
§
Imbalances in those systems make war inevitable.
§
International system best explains the emergence of wars
o
Kenneth Waltz: 3 images that explain war
•
Realist = no prospect for a world government
§
Because anarchy at level of international system is understood to be permanent.
o
Was very unique in that it was a rare occurrence.
§
Waltz wrote at time of international bi-polarity
o
Allow for alliances
§
Some consider a multi-polar system to be more stable
o
Ex: Cold War
•
Imbalances between two poles encourages taking advantage of superiority to weaken their adversary
§
Bi-polar system only has two poles
o
Bi-polarity ended with the falling of the Berlin wall and the end of the Cold War
o
Turned into a unipolar system which is different
o
Waltz’ third image the most important in explaining war
•
War of choice is inherently irrational
o
States are rational because they are disciplined by the international system.
o
States that remain in the international system are those that are relatively rational.
o
States are rational actors – not because they consist of rational people, but rather because they do not have the luxury to indulge in irrational acts.
•
Spent an enormous amount of wealth and military hardware than it had on any other war.
§
Despite all of that it ultimately lost the war.
§
Went into the war because of the “domino” theory.
§
Ex: intervention in Vietnam War – considered to be an act of irrationality
o
US foreign policy has some substantial problems in terms of rationality.
•
Always have to take actions on incomplete information in international relations.
•
Ex: Intervention in Iraq
§
US faced no threat and faced no need to engage in conflict but did anyways
o
“In the absence of threat, policy becomes capricious” – Waltz
o
therefore not nature of states but nature of the international system
o
Post Cold-War period
•
Individuals are not particularly important in shaping the activities of states.
o
Current environment had to be revised
•
In the absences of a major adversary, the US defined the nature of the international system.
•
US becomes crucial factor in the international system.
•
Mid Term
6 key terms to identify
•
dealing with broader themes of the course.
o
2 essay questions of which you will answer 1
•
Format for the final will be more or less the same as mid-term
•
Research Paper
No suggested research topics – choose your own topic
•
Research topic, research question, tentative hypothesis
o
Will provide opportunity to submit a research proposal – no more than 250 words
•
DUE OCTOBER 30th
•
Lecture
In the realm of comparative politics, those definitions are in keeping with the definitions argued in the textbook
o
Determines who is rewarded and who is not rewarded
•
Depending on what is in high demand on the market and what is not in high demand
•
Allocation can be done through command – some allocation is absolutely necessary.
•
Who pays taxes, who serves in the military, etc.
•
Politics is about command
•
Politics is about allocation
§
Who gets what when where and how
o
The definitions that prevail of the core subject matter is somewhat different than the understanding of those concepts in the realm of international relations
•
Political commands have unique feature of being enforceable against the will of those being commanded
•
What happens in legislature – and policy is made by pitting interests against each other through legislative systems
o
Politics takes place within societies
•
Politics is first and foremost and almost exclusively, not about who gets what when where and how within society but basic dichotomy of us vs. the other – friend vs. foe.
§
Every state has to be able to decide what other societies’ states they can peacefully coexist with and which they cannot.
§
Keep at bay the threat of order that is always imposed by other societies.
§
Carl Schmidt: The Concept of Political
o
International policy takes precedence over domestic policy.
o
In international relations politics is understood in a different manner
•
That government governs best by governing least
§
US constitution the output of that concept.
•
Make process of governing as inefficient as it could be
§
However, the American political system is geared towards lassie fair
o
Constitutional design was to protect minorities.
o
American foreign policy primarily concerned with security and survival.
•
The most important component is efficiency – government has to be efficient in order to address threats as quickly as possible.
•
It was always free from external threat – had a giant moat protecting itself from other powers.
o
While that protection allowed US to put national defense on the back burner – changed in the 20th century.
o
US emerged as a power under very unusual circumstances
•
States are crucial component of analysis – understanding what the state is will allow us to engage what foreign policy actually signifies.
o
Substantial disagreement about the nature of states – what states actually are
•
More important is outcome of competition between various groups to influence the state
§
Dependent variable = state not an actor but the thing being acted upon.
o
State is neutral arena in which competition take place. The outcome of which determine policy.
o
Understanding policy = looking at various forces that act on the state.
o
Foreign policy is simply an outgrowth of domestic policy.
o
Karl Marx.
§
Ruling class rules – even in a democracy, the capitalists rule
o
Liberals and pluralists see the state as a dependent variable
•
On a regular basis they trade places
o
In many cases they move from the corporate world to government service
o
Not too surprising that government acts in the interest of those dominant elites
o
Stuck between demands of accumulation, and demands of legitimation – that gap provides the state with relative autonomy.
•
Scope of that freedom to move is seriously limited.
•
Derives from keeping the economy flowing and does so by instituting policies that benefit the main economic actors, but at the same time in democratic context, if state were on
a regular basis exclusively to side with corporate interests, becomes difficult to sustain in keeping support of 99%
§
Instrumentalist view
§
State at best has relative autonomy.
o
Revolving door relationship between elites
•
Class conscious ruling class – assumption that all ruling elites share the same interest
§
No such thing as a “ruling class” – capitalists might have certain things in common, but they have separate interests – so they do not all share the same basic interests.
§
There is no reason to assume that the ruling class is one unit and are all the same.
§
Have a problem with the idea of the dependent variable – argued that it suffered from substantial problems
o
Not to defend capitalists, but to maintain long-term stability of the capitalist system as a whole.
§
Ex: 1930s, capital system faced deep deep crisis that was overcome by Roosevelt’s New Deal (welfare state, minimum wage, social security) based on taxing corporations to
create these programs for the poor.
§
The reason the state acts in the interest of capital has nothing to do with personal relationship
o
They are focused on their own ability to make profit.
§
Cannot explain that on the intervention of capitalists – they fought it tooth and nail
o
Maintaining the ability of companies as a whole to make profits.
o
The ruling class does not rule
o
Extensive ties between rulers of the states and rulers of the corporate world.
o
This relationship is a form of corruption that keeps the state from performing the role it is supposed to.
o
Structuralists
•
Lecture 1: Sept. 11