Log in to StudySoup
Get Full Access to Tulane - POLC 2300 - Study Guide
Join StudySoup for FREE
Get Full Access to Tulane - POLC 2300 - Study Guide

Already have an account? Login here
Reset your password

TULANE / Political Science - General / POLS 2300 / It is when you have different outcomes, the factor that was not in com

It is when you have different outcomes, the factor that was not in com

It is when you have different outcomes, the factor that was not in com


School: Tulane University
Department: Political Science - General
Course: Comparative Politics
Professor: Professor vail
Term: Fall 2015
Cost: 50
Name: 2300 Final Study Guide
Description: Here is a comprehensive study guide for Professor Vail's Comparative Politics class. It covers everything from the readings and class lecture. Hope this helps you guys out. Happy studying!
Uploaded: 12/09/2015
16 Pages 113 Views 5 Unlocks


It is when you have different outcomes, the factor that was not in common was probably the cause, what is it?

POLC 2300 Midterm Study Guide  

Week 1: What is Comparative Politics?  

A. Mill’s Comparative Methods, “Of the Four Methods of Experimental Inquiry”  1. Method of Agreement - when you have the same outcome, there is a prior factor ‘C’ in   all cases being compared, and ‘C’ would then be the cause  

 2. Method of Difference - when you have different outcomes, the factor that was not in   common was probably the cause  

B. William Sewell, “Marc Bloch and the Logic of Comparative History”  1. Hypothesis - everything must lead back to hypothesis  

 2. What to Compare - historical contemporaries, how they influence each other, similar   origins  

In george orwell, “politics and the english language”, what is the use of euphemisms, question-begging, and cloudy vagueness?

 3. Limits of Comparative History:  

 a. too general  

 b. places are sometimes too far in space and time to compare   c. can’t just compare one factor of a society, must take into account all different   aspects  

 d. not always hard facts when comparing  

C. Lecture Notes  

• humans are not reliable variables - world is unpredictable  

• can’t predict, but can examine  

• other ways look at political history - case studies, statistical studies, comparison  

Week 2: The Complexities of Historical and Political Analysis  

A. Stephen J. Gould, “The Hedgehog, the Fox and the Magister’s Pox: Mending the Gap  between Science and the Humanities”

What is the difference between the method of agreement and the method of difference?

Don't forget about the age old question of Whom would you contact to get into maximum physical shape?

 1. Punctuated Equilibrium - critical junctures (small moment of extreme trial and change)   2. science and arts/humanities coexist - study both Darwin and Shakespeare even today  B. George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language” Don't forget about the age old question of What is expected for the future with regards to warming temperatures?

 1. Faults in English Language - staleness of imagery and lack of precision; dying   metaphors, pretentious diction  

 2. Political Speech - the use of euphemisms, question begging and cloudy vagueness  C. Thomas S. Kuhn, “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”  

 1. Structure of Scientific Revolutions - episodic model (periods of conceptual continuity   in normal science were interrupted by revolutionary science (paradigm))   2. Normal Science and Paradigms Shifts  

D. Aristotle, “Politics”  

1. State is natural, not made; human society is inevitably and naturally hierarchal   2. Pairs exist, incapable of serving without each other (male/female for reproduction)   3. Household -> Village -> State -> State and the Individual  

 4. Man is a political animal  

E. Lecture Notes


• Empiricism - thinking facts are fixed and rigid, blinds us to explanations and inferences,  not effective in studying people who are unpredictable  

• Kuhnian Paradigms - scientific insight is not sudden, but develops slowly  • Aristotle - Politics is what determines who gets what, how much and from whom  If you want to learn more check out What behavior by one of the students offended the barbadian villagers?

Week 3: Classical Approaches to Political Economy: Liberalism, the Birth of Capitalism, and the  Industrial Revolution  

A. Max Weber, “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”  

1. capitalistic spirit existed before capitalist development *(ideas drove capitalism)   2. “calling” - religious task set by G-d to work (comes from Martin Luther)   3. Calvinism - created the spirit of capitalism - to what degree did religion help form and   expand spirit of capitalism?  

 4. Asceticism - self disciple in the name of religion, frugality of life, opposed   spontaneous enjoyment of life, duty to hold money and possessions, condemned   dishonestly/impulsive greed; led to idea of “calling”  

 5. Iron Cage: people became more secular, but still wanted more and more money - now   all we want is material goods  

B. Adam Smith, “Wealth of Nations”  

1. Division of Labor - time saved, more specialized skill sets, increase in worker   dexterity, machines facilitate labor; derived from tendency to “truck, barter and   exchange” - society is an organic entity (develops over time)  Don't forget about the age old question of Who discovered that tobacco grows well in a warm climate?

 2. Money - circulates consumable goods, value of use (in daily use) and value of   exchange (how many good it can buy)  

 3. “invisible hand” - people do what’s in their best interest (basis of market), which in   turn betters society

 4. Moral Sentiments - humans are not naturally exploitative - empathy   5. Labor Theory of Value - value is the function of amount of labor put into it  C. Robert L. Heilbroner, “The Wonderful World of Adam Smith”  

1. Economic Laws of the Market - desire for wealth (self interest) and competition   (prevents overcharging) - these opposing law balance the market   2. Capitalism balances itself out, but not in our world, too many interferences such as   unions, monopolies, etc..  

 3. Law of Accumulation - accumulation of profits - which then go back into the market;   higher wages -> better quality of life (longer lives) but decreasing profits   4. Law of Population - working class increases in size; wages go back down, profits   continue; should reach promised reward (where poverty and wealth balance out) D. E.J. Hobsbawn, “Industry and Empire: An Economic History of Britain since 1750”  1. Britain was well-kept, good navy, a lot of exports  

 2. Sectors of Demand: Domestic Market, Exports (textiles), Government (oversee)   3. Materialism approach - Interested in actions in history (events) rather than ideas   4. Industrial Revolution began with cotton  

 5. Industrialist population divides into capitalist employers and workers   6. **profit and markets drove everything! Don't forget about the age old question of Who was the roman emperor from 161 to 180?


 7. Iron Cage - rationalization of society - people stop making money for G-d and instead   use it to indulge for themselves  

E. Lecture Notes  

• Industrial Revolution:  

- beginning of modern world  Don't forget about the age old question of For how long was there no difference between a christian and a jew?

- began in exile industry  

- agrarian -> town/cities (bad condition for workers in cities)  

- social classes form - class distinction - middle class and working class (proletariat and  bourgeois)  

- feudalism ended after revolution - no more obligation to workers  

- timing of industrialization determines characteristics  

- Britain industrialized because of … labor, market and capital  

• labor - enclosure acts, spenalman laws  

• markets - not natural! created by deliberate political processes  

• capital - gradual expansion of money, money from government and Banks contributed  • Adam Smith  

- not an advocate of laissez faire - government should allow economic activity to the extent  that society is not being undermined  

- Classical Liberalism - government should allow economic activity

- market is self regulating but not self-sustaining  

- state must regulate economy so state does not destroy itself  

• Max Weber  

- Western Europe, not great (not many resources - underdeveloped), BUT stands apart  because of Calvanist Protestantism (IDEAS) consistent with capitalist productivity  - rationalization  

- Demystification of the Church - people want direct relationship with G-d - bible translated  into vernacular (more people involved directly with religion)

- pre-destination (damned or saved) - but theologically compelled to work (didn’t know if  good or bad ending)  

- accumulate money - don't spend - invest  

- BELIEFS at certain time/places are the cause of capitalism** (culture)  

Week 4: Classical Approach to Political Economy II: Marx and the Critique of Capitalism  A. Robert L. Heilbroner, “The Inexorable World of Karl Marx”  

1. Marx and Engel believed that capitalism would collapse because it overproduces one   good and underproduces another  

 2. dialectal materialism  

 3. surplus value  

 4. Marx explains history in terms of class struggle for survival (exploitation of one class   by another)  

 5. Communist Manifesto - states revolutionary aims of communism and maintains that   capitalism will inevitably destroy itself  

 6. Das Kapital - analysis of the means of capitalism destruction, economically


 7. Agrees with Labor Theory of Value - profits come from one product - LABOR   8. How capitalism destroys itself  

• more machinery, labor supply up (more people looking for work), wages go down ….  revolution  

• situation gets worse and worse for laborers  

B. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, “The Communist Manifesto”  

1. Class struggles - proletariat (laborers, exploited, REAL revolutionary class, eventually   destroys bourgeois) and bourgeois (revolutionary role to create communism - own the   means of production)  

 2. proletariats must overthrow bourgeois (“Proletariats have nothing to lose but their   chains. They have a world to win.”)

C. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, “The German Ideology”  

1. Private Property and Communism - social classes derive from property - revolutionary   struggle  

 2. Communist Revolution - becomes an individual collective - ideals appeal to humanity,   ideas appeal natural and universal  

 3. Egotism and Communism - private interests develop into class interest - theory that   self interest is good  

D. Karl Marx, “Capital”  

1. Fetishism of Commodities  

 2. Sale of Labor Power - Surplus Value  

E. Lecture Notes  

• Marx agrees with Smith that the division of labor is defining characteristic of economy and  that society is an organic entity - but differ because Marx see division of labor as exploitative  and Smith believes that division of labor is good and allows people to do what they want  

• Working Class Alienation - dehumanizing labor - workers alienated from the products of their  labor  

• state always represents the ideas of the ruling class - politics only further their interests  (bourgeois)  

• Marx as an economist understood capitalism  

• some people today question capitalism - some don't  

• because of alienation, consumers don't think of labor behind the product  • Marx vs. Smith  

- time periods were different… industrialization that Smith (1776) saw was different than the  economic situation that Marx (1848) saw as exploitative  

- In Smith’s world, the owners are the workers and in Marx’s world, the owners employ other  workers  

- Smith believed in moral sentiments and Marx believed in exploitation


Week 5: Classical Approaches to Political Economy III: Paths to Modernization and Economic  Growth  

A. Daniel Lerner, The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East  1. physical mobility -> social mobility  

 2. The Mobile Personality - empathy (ability to see a situation from someone else’s   perspective)  

 3. Mobility Multipler - Mass Media  

 4. urbanization -> increased literacy rates -> media participation -> political participation   5. critical limits to urbanization = function of its population  

 6. participatory societies depend on individual desires to participate  B. Alexander Gerschenkron, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective  1. development in a backward country tends to differ from that of an advanced country   2. industrialization in a backward country has faster development, and is more   productive/organized  

C. W.W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto  1. Traditional Society (limited production functions) -> Preconditions for Take-Off   (intrusion of advance countries, investment)-> Take-Off (self sustainable growth)—>   Drive to Maturity (sustained progress) -> Age of High Mass Consumption (consumer   good and services)

D. Joseph R. Gusfield, “Tradition and Modernity: Misplaced Polarities in the Study of Social  Change”  

1. Fallacies in the assumption that tradition and modernity cannot exist together is wrong E. Lecture Notes  

• post war optimism  

• Capitalism/Democracy = optimal future  

• America “rescued Europe” - containment in the Cold War  

• Marshall Plan - Europe changes to free market and democracy (not just because of U.S.)  • Capitalism and Democracy go together - “All Good Things Go Together”  • post-war rejection of Marxism - capitalism seen as the solution (worked in Europe, why not try  in Latin America, etc…)  

• Alliance for Progress and USAID  

• Modernization Theory  

- Staged Conception of History - stages lead to prosperity (Rostow)  

- Dichotomous View of Change - countries categorized into “backward” and “advanced”,  “rural” and “urban” (Gerschenkron)  

- Notion of Inevitable Progress - desirability of modern institutions (Lerner - kind of)  - Interconnectedness of All Aspects of Change - democracy and capitalism go together  • Limitations to Modernization Theory  

- some countries advance in one way and not another  

- no mechanism for change - why do countries change?  

- no explanation of institutional differences  

- no explanation of different rates or processes of change  

- empirical counterexamples - tradition and modernity can mutually exist


Week 6: Competing Explanations of Revolutions  

A. Theda Skocpol, States and Social Revolutions  

1. Social revolution - lasting transformation of a society’s state and class structures   2. Structural Perspective - revolutions not made, they come***  

 3. Why Russia, France and China? - countries has long-lived state and class structures,   wealthy and political ambitious states, rebellions by lower class/peasants, attempts at   mass mobilization (political groups)

B. Hannah Arendt, On Revolution  

1. viewed revolution as a result of their goal - goal: FREEDOM - revolutionary cause of   freedom - revolution must aim for political freedom

C. Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies  

1. The political gap - gap between developed and underdeveloped countries is increasing   2. not the form of government but rather the degree of government*   3. economic and political development are independent  

 4. Revolution - rapid, fundamental and violent domestic change in dominant values and   myths of a society  

 5. Western Pattern of Revolution - political institutions collapse, new political groups   more and create of new political institutions  

 6. Eastern Pattern of Revolution - new political groups, new political institutions, and   violent overthrow of old political institutions  

 7. Political Mobilization - moderates, liberals, and radical revolutionaries   8. Pre-requisites for revolution - political institutions that do not provide a channel for   participation AND individuals desire to participate (quest for participation)   9. Less likely to occur in democratic societies (people have input)*   10. Lumpenproletariat, Industrial Labor, Middle Class Intelligentsia and Peasantry  D. Lecture Notes  

• revolution is overused term  

• relatively rare occurrences - why? - post medieval world (used to be static, hierarchal) and  must have a State, political elite AND organized political institutions and groups that want  change  

• not a revolt or rebellion….  

• Revolts  

- short-lived, usually unsuccessful, less organized, more spontaneous, don't necessarily  change order  

• definition of revolution: lasting transformation in a country’s political/economic/social order,  brought about by sustained and ordered changes  

• Skocpol  

- Social Revolution- class based revolts (Russia, China and France)  

- involves a class upheaval  

- product of structural instability and problems  

- state is an arena for competition  

• Arendt’s View on Revolution  

- lack of freedom in early life


- revolution as a search for freedom (positive and negative freedom - positive: human dignity  - negative: ending constraint)  

- revolutions will create reactionary counterrevolutions  

- most radical revolutionaries -> become conservative in new order  

- defined revolution by end result not process***  

- pessimistic about chances of success  

- Limitations: doomed to fail? why try? also hard to compare revolutions based on “failed  goals”  

• Huntington  

- revolution as modernization  

- similar to structural arguments of Skocpol  

- focused on institutions (mechanisms of political change) - political processes cause  modernization  

- revolutions as filling an institutional void  

- legitimization occurs in many ways, every type of government has a mechanism of  legitimization - when this stops working -> revolution (ex: France)  

- revolution is middle-class phenomenon (educated, organized and eager to participate)  

Weeks 7-8: Comparative Cases of Revolution: England and France  

A. Skocpol, States and Social Revolutions  

1. STRUCTURE approach -  

 2. revolution explanations - rise of the bourgeoisie and Enlightenment critique of   traditional authority  

 3. Class conflict was not the cause of the revolution in France  

 4. War and Fiscal Dilemma!  

 5. Agrarian Structures and Peasant Insurrections

B. E.J. Hobsbawn, The Age of Revolution  

1. France - massive social revolution - “feudal reaction” sparked the revolution -   aristocratic attempt to recapture the State  

 2. IDEAS played huge role in revolution***  

C. Michael Walzer, The Revolution of the Saints  

1. Emergence of Radical Politics - the saints (oppositional men who wanted change) -   16th century  

 2. Calvanist politics - radicalism- modernization - 16th/17th century = crucial phase in   modernization  

D. Lecture Notes  

1. English Revolution  

- England was pretty stable - rare political violence  

- war on religion - Protestants vs. Catholics (Parliament vs. Royalists)  

- rapid violent change (Gould - punctuated equilibrium)  

- State Weaknesses and Structural Roots of Revolution  

• Military -no/weak standing army


• Administration - alliance between landed gentry and king  

• Financial - Parliament controlled money, no taxation by crown alone, more about keeping  nobility weak than the state strong  

- King Makes Enemies  

• pissed off and executed/persecuted Puritans as a religious group  

• Charles I promoted Catholicism and pushed down Church of England  

• Puritans were ideal fighting force - fought in the name of G-d - New Model Army led by  Cromwell  

• pissed of Parliament  

• Tunnage and Poundage Act - tax on imports/exports without Parliament approval -> Petition  of Right - king cannot make tax without Parliament approval  

- people still wanted monarchy, national symbol, economic stability before  2. French Revolution  

- overthrew absolutist monarchy  

- after Louis 14th…monarchy power went down  

- Enlightenment ideas -> popular sovereignty  

- Estates General (Nobility, Clergy and Third Estate (everyone else))  

- Liberal Revolution  

• ended with constitutional monarchy  

• middle-class revolution mainly BUT (aristocratic, upper middle class, popular (Bastille) and  peasant revolutions)  

- Radical Revolution….Liberal Constitutional Monarchy didn't work because..  • Religious conflict - Church officials had to swear Oath of Loyalty - religious test of loyalty  • Nationalism - loyalty to revolution = loyalty to the State  

• some nobles, and Louis 16th, fled country - seen as counter revolutionaries  • Mob/Urban Masses  

• Total War and The Great Terror (Jacobins accused everyone of being counter revolutionaries  - persecutions/executions)  

• Arendt: most radical revolutionaries become new conservatives*  

• too radical, backfired, didn't work  

Week 9: Competing Explanations of Democracy  

A. Moore, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy  

1. Factors responsible for England’s progress toward democracy  

 a. no serious peasant problem: land enclosures - destroyed peasantry class   b. commercial interests with its own base (landed upper class)   c. strong independent parliament - gradual and peaceful transition - strengthened   middle class  

 2. Routes to democracy: bourgeois revolution -> Western form of democracy;   conservative revolution -> fascism; peasant revolution -> communism   3. slow, long-term economic growth leads to democracy, not just change in elites  B. Samuel P. Huntington, “Democracy’s Third Wave”  

 1. democracy will spread to the extent that this in power want it to


 2. Five factors significant to third wave transitions:  

 i. legitimacy problems with authoritarian governments  

 ii. global economic growth of 1960s  

 iii. shift in Catholic Church - oppose authoritarianism  

 iv. policy changes in external actors  

 v. snowballing - transitions to democracy provide medals for other countries   3. Obstacles to democracy: lower economic development, extremely strong upper class,   huge influential peasant class, dictatorship/authoritarianism, absence of experience   with democracy, and culture/values  

C. Lipset, Political Man  

1. Democracy entails opportunity for changing government officials AND social   mechanism that allows influence from the masses  

 2. average wealth, degree of urbanization/industrialization and education = higher in   more democratic countries (similar to Lerner -modernization theory)   3. thinks that economic development leads to democracy  

D. Lecture Notes  

1. Procedural (Structural) vs. Substantive Democracy - basic elections, representative  parliament vs. a real participative system  

2. Explanation to Democracy: Elite-based (class) attempts vs. Economic development  (Moore)  

3. Moore - commercialization of agriculture, enclosures and weakness of aristocracy ->  led to democratization in England; believed economic interests define political  interests; similar to modernization b/c its natural and occurs from changes in society  and the economy  

 a. weaknesses to Moore - extrapolates from England and applies to whole world;   under emphasizes political decisions; b/c classes are seen as united forces,   individuals don't have much say?  

4. Economic development and democratization - casual or correlative?  

5. Factors to Consider in Explaining Democratization - 1) The role of leadership  2) economic factors/social class 3) democratization as a political act  

Week 10: Comparative Cases of Democratization  

A. Elisabeth Wood, Foraging Democracy from Below: Insurgent Transitions in South Africa  and El Salvador  

1. Labor repressive institutions and Recalcitrant Elites in Oligarchic Societies ->   sustained insurgency as a response to the state AND a change in elite interests9  2. South Africa and El Salvador Route to Democracy in Oligarchic Society - sustained   mobilization from below by the working class (structural and process-oreitned   approach to democratic transitions)  

 3. insurgency altered the perceptions and interests of the elite (better to compromise than   to keep losing) = interdependence of classes (cross-class coalitions) - role of class   actors  

 4. decrease in agro-export -> changed elites interest


 5. Moore vs. Wood  

 a. Moore thinks that agrarian labor relations is an obstacle to democratization -   wants commercialization of agriculture (thinks it will destroy elite class)   b. Wood thinks that commercial agriculture is not what destroys the elite, it was   the sustained insurgency  

B. Frances Hagopian, “Democracy by Undemocratic Means? Political Pacts, and Regime  Transitions in Brazil  

 1. Political elites (with help from citizen’s elite) created political negotiations (political   pacts) - this process hinder democratization because of benefit to elites (what about   majority rule?)  

 2. political pacts: 1) strengthened military/traditional political elites 2) revived   clientelism and 3) weakened political parties  

 3. democratic institutions may have existed because of these pacts, but they need   democratic actors - political pacts cannot consolidate/extent democracy on their own   4. must have both socioeconomic forces AND political forces working together to   reshape political systems**  

C. Lecture Notes  

1. must have meaningful input, good leaders and democratic structure  

2. democratization is driven by BOTH elites and structure  

3. El Salvador: military elite dominated agro-exporting -> FLMN (leftist group - kinda  communist) tried to make more democratic structure of econ/society -> U.S. sports  right wing movement (fear of communism)  

4. Brazil: (more procedural than substantive) elites create democratic institutions through  pacts -> no meaningful political competition -> must have structures AND human  values of democracy  

5. England: peaceful and gradual transition to democracy; from Elite Democracy to Mass  Democracy  

 • Moore argues that the commercialization of agriculture is why they democratized   gradually and peacefully, it destroyed the peasant class and led to the mixing of landed   elite and growing middle class  


Week 11: Inter-War Regime Outcomes inEurope: Fascism and Assaults on the Liberal Order  A. Luebbert, “Social Foundations of Political Order in Interwar Europe  

 1. Pluralist Democracy, Social Democracy (Norway, Sweden), Fascism (Germany),   Traditional Dictatorship (Finland, Austria, Hungary)  

 5. Moore/Gerschekron: think that Fascism is the outcome of landed elite control of rural   masses (Germany) -> WRONG (landed elite control not required for an authoritarian   regime)  

 6. Explanation for the weakness of interwar democracy: lack of cooperation among   democrats, and polarization between working class and elites  

B. Linz and Stepan, The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes: Europe  

1. parliamentary system: “division of labor” between civil society, political society and   institutions


 2. Fascism results from a failure of this parliamentary system, rather than an irresistible   force (structural approach) -  

 a. Germany - failure to recognize functions political parties   b. Italy - use of private violence  

 3. Impact of economic recessions -> mobilization -> radicals -> rise of Fascism/Nazism

C. Kershaw, The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation  1. Fascism is more applicable than totalitarian in explaining Nazism  

 a. Why? Totalitarianism focuses of methods of rule, whereas Fascism focuses on   growth, aims and functions of the state  

 2. The features that distinguish Nazism are just meant to be looked at in the context of   post-war industrial-bourgeois Germany  

 3. some argue that Nazism is specific to Germany in this context because of Hitler  

D. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany  1. Hindler led the Army  

 2. Strausser/Gobeels - sympathized with “left” (socialists and  

 communists_ - Hitler didn’t like and made them stop  

 3. Geli Rubal - his niece (he was in love with her but she killed herself)   4. Hindenberg - appointed Hitler as Chacellor - forced by Hitler  

 5. Shleicher - second Chancellor of Germany

E. Weber, The Hollow Years: France in the 1930s  

1. Pacifism in France inter-war time period; saw patriotism as evil  

 2. Devaluation of the franc and inflation (due to failure of government economic policies,   unemployment, strikes, economy falling

F. Lecture Notes

1. End of 19th century - progress, prosperity through Capitalism, advance of Democracy  2. Fascism:  

- hyper nationalism  

- oppressive government  

- militarization of the state  

- monopoly of political power  

- rejection socialism/democracy  

- repression of working class/unions  

- AIMS: state more important people, state power = highest form of life, demands active  loyalty,  

- Fascism in Germany:  

• territorial ambition, more genocidal, Hitler’s ideology = strong  

• conflict with communists, The Right didn't want communism so they accept Nazism, The  Left town between Socialism, Communism and Democracy  

- Fascism in Italy:  

• less genocidal, Mussolini filled a void in the Italian political system  

• Right saw Socialism as enemy; Left want Socialism - largest party


• Role of Catholic Church - prioritized anti-Communist over democracy AND gave active  support for Mussolini and Fascists  

3. Democracy:  

- Britain and France  

- British had gradual and peaceful transition to democracy  

- France gets taken over by Nazis  

4. Common Problematic Explanations for the Rise of Fascism  

- culture  

- leaders/leadership  

- social/economic stresses  

5. Social Classes  

- no link between social class and political behavior (in Germany - religion was a better  predictor)  

Week 12: Case Studies: Development and Liberalization in Late Developers  A. Chaudhry, “The Myths of the Market and the Common History of Late Developers”   1. The market has no self contained blueprint; the market is a product of the state;   markets are not organic (developing countries do not have the capacity to regulate the   market)  

 2. estatiste comes from failures of institutions/administration and political conflicts   3. intrusive economic policies of late developers often grow out of these failures to create   a functioning market, signaling administrative ineffectiveness  

B. Frank, “The Development of Underdevelopment”  

 1. capitalism is the main cause of underdevelopment  

 2. history of a country characterizes that country’s development  

 3. center countries take/exploit surplus capital/cheap labor/raw materials from periphery   4. must look at historical, holistic, and structural approach for underdeveloped countries  C. Evans, Dependent Development: The Alliance of Multinational, State and Local Capital in  Brazil  

1. Imperialism (classic dependence) keeps developing country’s producing raw materials   and keeps them “backwardness” (doesn’t help them develop) and benefits the elite   class  

 2. dependency theory provides an analysis of how imperialism affects internal social   structures of peripheral countries (alliance between multinational, local and state   capital)  

 3. Classic Dependence (only agro-export economy) vs. Dependent Development   (internalization of process of production - more variety and more domestic;   introduction of foreign capital; ; changing role of the State to be more interventionist)   4. Import substitution Industrialization  

D. Lecture Notes  

1. Import Substitution Industrialization  

- attempt to make people buy lower quality domestic products (to prevent dependence) by  increasing tariffs and having an active state (


2. Dependency Theory  

- theory that the country is divided into Core and Periphery countries (sometimes semi periphery)  

- Limitations: no rapid economic growth, and concentrated too much power in the State  3. Economic Liberalization  

- globalization - increasing interconnectedness of world economy - pressure liberalization  - Washington Consensus - recipe for liberalization (important b/c develping coutnries need  there institutions (World Bank) for loans!  

• Liberalization - 1) reduction in gov spending 2) removal of price/capital controls of the state  3) reduction of tariffs 4) privatization of the state institutions  

• problems: increase in poverty, social unrest, political instability  

4. Approaches to Post-Communist Economic Liberalization  

- “Shock Therapy” = rapid liberalization and privatization of economy, price controls and  regulation were lifted  

- problems: undermines economy, increase in poverty, unfair outcomes (wealthy benefit),  poetical backlash/social unrest  

- Gradual Reform = avoid political backlash and poverty; generally more successful, still  problems tho…  

Week 13-14: Post-War Politics in Advanced Industrial Countries: Institutions, Economic Growth,  and the Rise of the Post-War Welfare State  

A. Lipset and Rokkan, “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments”   1. National Revolution  

 a. (first and second critical line of cleavage)  

 1) conflict between central nation building culture and increasing resistances in   distinct subject populations  

 2) conflict between centralizing, standardizing, and mobilizing nation state and   the historically established privileges of the Church  

 2. Industrial Revolution  

 b. (third and fourth critical line of cleavage)  

 1) conflict between landed interest and rising class of industrial entrepreneurs   (rural vs. urban)  

 2) conflict sweeten owners/employees and tenants/laborers/workers (owner   vs. worker)  

B. Hall, Governing the Economy: The Politics of State Intervention in Britain and France  1. systems theory: politics as performance of functions, prerequisite to the maintenance of   given political and economic systems  

 2. group theory: organized groups contend for influence over political economy (good,   but does not explain why some groups gain more power than others)   3. the organization of State, labor and capital are important to policy outcomes (all of   these are intrinsic to the socioeconomic structure of the nation)  C. Shonfield, Modern Capitalism: the Changing Balance of Public and Private Power


1. enhancing the power of wage earner (policies that support the lower classes) does not   equal less investment  

 2. U.S. had more frequent and intense recession than Europe (1950s/60s) because…. U.S.   a reluctance to use the government to stimulate economy  

D. Marshall, “Citizenship and Social Class”  

 1. citizenship is becoming the architect of social inequality - the social right to real   income is not proportionate to its market value  

E. Lecture Notes  

- 1945, “Zero Hour”: Daunting Challenges of Reconstruction: physical damage, inflation,  unemployment, food shortages  

- paradox of thrift: everyone cannot save at once  

- Keynes: proposed that markets don’t always regulate themselves, when AD is low,  government can spur economic growth by spending  

- Post-war France: dirigiste (statist politics) state controlled banks and banks controlled indusrty  (to improve economic and political status)  

- Post-war Germany: became a social market economy, capitalist and supported by a welfare  state; led to prosperity  

- Post-war Britain: Keynesianism, expansion of welfare state  

- Welfare State  

• mechanism to allow capitalism to prosper  

• government action = fiscal policy to increase AD and build automatic stabilizers  • the welfare state addresses: capitalism destroying itself, corporatism and inflation and rising  prices (1970s), and international competition with low wage economies (to keep U.s. firms  from outsourcing)  

• Myths:  

1. the purpose of the welfare state is to redistribute income from the rich to the poor  (most of the money goes to the middle class)  

2. The left expands the welfare state and the right cuts it back (comes from both parties -  Clinton’s bipartisan passing of welfare reform)  

3. Undermines investment and competitiveness (counterexamples: Sweden and  Germany)  

Week 15: The Post-2007 Economic Crisis, The Politics of Austerity, and Debates over the future  of Capitalism  

A. Stiglitz, The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future  1. GDP does not require an adequate measure of well-being  

 2. trickle-down economics (giving to the top to benefit everyone) doesn’t work   3. even though market forces help shape the degree of inequailty… government polices   shape this market forces (result of government action or inaction)   4. rent seeking: when the wealthy can increase their wealth (through political processes)   without increasing their productivity, and at the expense of everyone else  B. Krugman, “How Do Economists Get It So Wrong?”


 1. the belief that financial markets always set the right price blinded many, if not most,   economists to the emergence of the biggest financial bubble in history   2. “political ideology masquerading as fiscal policy”  

 3. Salt-Water Economists vs. Fresh Water Economists  

 4. Keynesianism economics remain the best framework we have for making sense of   recession/depression  

 5. economists need to abandon the idea that people are rational and that markets work   perfectly  

C. Stewart, “Eight Days: The Battle to Save the American Financial Institution   1. Treasury - directed capital into banks  

 2. Lehman’s failure = disasters  

 3. victory over Keynes over Adam Smith (intervention over laisez faire)   4. Obama’s attempts to fix economic legislation (more regulation, more Fed power, etc.)   was defeated by Congress  

D. Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous Idea  

1. austerity: policy of cutting the State’s budget to promote growth -> paradox of thirst ->   doesn't work in practice, relies on the poor to pay for mistakes of the rich, rests on the   absence of a large fallacy of consumption -> not a good solution   2. not to blame the welfare state, blame the banks (debt generated by implosion of U.S.   financial system NOT state spending)  

 3. both sides (Bush and Clinton) expanded the debt - and inflation remained stable   4. a strong democracy and a supportive lower class ensures the rich will stay rich (they   should support polices that support the lower classes)

E. Mettler, The Submerged State: How Invisible Government Policies Undermine American  Democracy  

1. Submerged State - existing policies that lay beneath the surface of U.S. market   institutions and within the federal tax system (benefit the wealthy and invisible to the   average American) -> fosters economic inequality  

 3. undermining citizenship and democracy?  

 2. some of the most expensive social policies are within the income tax system (tax   breaks) BUT people are not relating these befits to government action … little   perception of government helping them  

F. Gray, “The Liberal Delusion”  

1. “West is best” policies = a bunch of failed states  

 2. “Freedom is not mere absence of tyranny, it requires a functioning state, a competent   bureaucracy and a legal system that is not corrupt  

 3. Russian attempts to undermine the West (hyper modern despotism)   4. idea that growing middle class will secure freedom and that economic modernization   will promote liberal values is NOT necessarily true  

 5. Middle East: dictator overthrown by Islamic version of illiberal democracy or failed   states


G. Lecture Notes  

- golden age (1950s/60s) = growth, full employment, expansion of welfare states (favbored by  both left and right)  

- 1973: OPEC Oil Shock -> inflation!  

- prosperity -> austerity  

- Why? Hypothesis of globalization: idea that the world is more interconnected means that  government action is less important (because supposedly fewer decision are subject to state  authority) -> INCORRECT: 1) government still has obvious function to play (empirically  can still tax, etc.) 2) different types of globalization exist 3) political responses are still  unpredictable  

- cases of 2007 financial crisis: 1) gradual dismantling of regulations 2) housing bubble 3)  paradigm problem (assumption that market will regulate itself)  

- Governments are NOT like households (budgets do not have to necessarily be balanced, they  can print money and survive regardless) and economic systems do not run themselves  - raising interest rates and cutting spending = not the right thing to do in a recession  



Page Expired
It looks like your free minutes have expired! Lucky for you we have all the content you need, just sign up here