Capi Past Paper PDF

CAPI 1. **[Class]** **What is state?** - State is the human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence within a given territory - Westphalian: mutual recognition of states, equality, intervention in domestic politics of other states is not allo...

CAPI 1. **[Class]** **What is state?** - State is the human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence within a given territory - Westphalian: mutual recognition of states, equality, intervention in domestic politics of other states is not allowed, internal monopoly of violence - only territorial is accepted, territorially limited -- boundaries clearly defined and fixed **How to make inhabitants willing to pay taxes, to serve in army and to contribute to states´s wealth and power?** - To make them belief they should be loyal to state, belonging to a national political community - With the help of invented traditions, uniform language and culture, education, media **The emergence of nation-states** - Nation: political community with sense of communality (etnic -- descent, culture, history or civic -- values, rules, institutions) - Initially, nations constructed within territorial states - Many nations without states -- Catalunya, Scotland **Federalism** - Federal states: self-rule and shared rule (sovereignty shared between two autonomous levels of government, both their competences are protected by written constiution, arbitration by supreme court, agreement by both levels required to change system - Federations work together to deal with external threat or strengthen international roles - Unitary states -- one central government that can change the system unilaterally **Citizenship** - Concerns the membership of a political community involving: rights (civil, social), obligations, participation, identity - Criteria: birthplace, descent, living place **Comparative Politics** - Everything political can be compared, but in practice Comparative politics focuses on domestic politics - Comparisons in order to describe similarities and differences, seeking patterns, developing explanations 2. **[Democracy]** **Political institutions** - Formal and informal rules and norms that shape and constrain political behaviour - Demos -- citizens (not everyone had right to vote) **Democracy in ancient Greece** - Citizens directly involved in decision-making - Public officials selected by lot, rotation or election - Aristotle´s classification of regimes: **Number of rulers** **For the good of all (good form)** **For the good of the rulers (bad)** ---------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------- **One** Monarchy Tyranny **Few** Aristocracy Oligarchy **Many** Politeia (mixture of democratic and aristocratic elements) Democracy - Representation and elections have medieval origin **How can democracy be defined?** - Aristotle: the degree a regime serves the public good - Freedom house: civil and political rights - Joseph Schumpeter: institutional arrangement for decision -- making in which power is obtained through competitive elections - R. Dahl´s definition of polyarchy (new concept) -- power to the many, contestations and also inclusion - Polity V: indicators of competition, inclusion and constraints on executive power How can democracy be measured? - Depending on the definition (procedural or substantive)  How are democracies organized? - MAJORITATIAN DEMOCRACY: - CONSENSUS DEMOCRACY - Economic development - Socio-economic inequality - Strenght and type of institutions - Elites commitment to democratic values - International influence **[Democratic backsliding and illiberalism in the Visegráds]** **\ Democratic backsliding** - Destabilisation and reverting to semi-authoritarian practices and declining popular involvement in democracy **Illiberal democracy** - Democracy about free and fair elections, liberalism about civil liberties and rights and rule of law -authoritarianism vs. illiberalism : first anti-democracy, second anti-citizen rights **Hungary** - Electoral democracy - Elections are free but unfair - Political system: mixed electoral system, unicameral (one chamber), ceremonial president **Poland** - Electoral democracy - The dominance of the ruling party in public media further amplified its advantage (2019) - Political system: proportional system, bicameral, semi-presidential system **Hungary** and **Poland** are poster children of post-communist transition yet most extreme backsliders plus Orbán promotes illiberalism abroad. In both countries leaders were open about what are their objectives. **Hungary** - New constitution "Fundamental/Basic law" - Electoral rules modifications: increased majoritarianism - Political appintments to occupy courts, state institutions, central bank etc. - Public broadcasting and buy up private media - Gradual overtake of education, civil society - National system of cooperation: creating a Fidesz loyal oligarchy -- overtaking banking sector **Poland** - Late 2015 electoral victory PiS and coalition of United Right, absolute majority (and presidency before) -- 2019 loss of senate majority - Constitutional Tribunal appointment conflict with outgoing PO-PSL government -- law to occupy Tribunal: forced retirement of judges in Supreme Court, Muzzle law: disciplinary chamber, Public broadcasting occupation, surveillance law and attempt to overtake private media, but various upheavals, occupation state institutions and SOEsň  **Why is backsliding problematic?** - In minimalist terms, the competitive alteration of governments -- democracy is an "institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people´s vote" - Four defining attributes: 1. Free and fair elections 2. Universal participation -- right to vote and run for office 3. Civil liberties -- to exercise citizen role and protection against government 4. Responsible government: responsive to parliament/voters within constitutional limits - High quality democracy is important for: peaceful resolution of conflict, equal opportunities or outcomes, economic stability, growth and innovation, legal integrity and functioning of EU Populism - People against elites - They claim to interpret the people but their representation of people is narrow (white, ideology) **READING QUESTIONS:\ **1. An important difference among modern democracies involves the distinction between parliamentary and presidential systems. **a. How do these forms of democracies differ with respect to:** **- i. elections of the legislature and the head of the government;** \- Parliamentary system: legislature elected by the public, prime minister typically chosen from the majority party -Presidential system: legislature and the head of government are elected separately, president is directly elected by the public or the electoral college **- ii. the separation of powers and functions between the executive and legislative;** -parliamentary system: fusion of powers, the legislature can remove the government through a vote of no confidence -presidential system: strict separation of powers, president operates independently of the legislature **- iii. the roles of head of government and head of state;** -parliamentary system: prime minister (head of government) and the head of state (monarch, president) are distinct roles. President limited or ceremonial powers, while the prime minister leads the government -presidential system: the president serves as both the head of government and the of state **- iv. the timing of elections?** -parliamentary system: fixed intevals unless the government loses a vote of no confidence or dissolves the legislature -presidential system: fixed intervals **Another important set of differences among democratic systems involves the distinction between majoritarian and consensus democracies.** a. **How would you describe the key differences between these different democratic systems?** -structure of government, executive-legislative relations, concentration of power Majoritarian: Power is concentrated in the hands of a majority party or coalition. One group governs, while others serve as the opposition. Consensus: Power is shared broadly. Decision-making often involves negotiation and compromise among multiple parties or groups. Majoritarian: The executive branch often dominates, especially in parliamentary systems where the majority controls both the executive and legislature. Consensus: Power is more balanced between the executive and legislature, with mechanisms to ensure minority participation. Majoritarian: Often features unitary and centralized government. Consensus: Usually involves federal or decentralized systems, with power distributed among regions. b. **What do you think are the most important consequences of these systems for the policy-making process?** -efficiency, policy stability Majoritarian: Policies can be implemented quickly, as the ruling party or coalition faces fewer procedural hurdles. **Consensus**: Policies take longer to develop but are often more inclusive and stable, reflecting a broader range of societal interests. Majoritarian: Policies may shift significantly with changes in government, leading to potential instability. Consensus: Policies tend to be more consistent over time, as they require broader agreement to enact. **If you were to advice a new country to choose a form of democracy, which of type of democratic system (parliamentary vs. presidential, consensus vs. majoritarian) would you suggest? Why?** A parliamentary consensus model is good for a new country setting up a democratic system. Parliamentary systems ensure efficient governance and flexibility by aligning the executive with the legislature. Consensus democracy promotes inclusivity and stability, integrating diverse groups through proportional representation and coalition-building. This approach creates policies that reflect broad societal agreement, fostering long-term policy sustainability. While coalition governance may be slower, this system balances effective decision-making with the representation essential for a unified and stable democracy. **While the level of democracy enjoyed by the average global citizen had been increasing in the past decades, anno 2020 it is back to the levels of 1990.** a. **How would you define democratic backsliding? Can you give some recent examples of cases of democratic backsliding?** Democratic backsliding means that democratic institutions, norms and practices are slowly being lost because it is legal to do so. It usually involves limits on civil liberties, less control on government, and elections that are not free and fair. Hungary and Turkey are recent examples. In Hungary, Viktor Orbán\'s government controls the judiciary and media. In Turkey, President Erdoğan has limited press freedom and expanded executive powers. In Poland, changes to the courts have raised concerns about their independence. b. **How do you think one could prevent or turn around democratic backsliding?** To stop democracy going backwards, we need to make sure our political system is strong and people are involved. An independent judiciary and free media keep an eye on authoritarianism. Civil society groups can raise awareness and demand accountability. Pressure from other countries can stop governments from undermining democracy. It is important to encourage a political culture that respects democracy. 3. **Elections and participation** **Elections** - Are institutions - Electoral systems shape the behaviour of voters - Voting cannot be only explained by the preferences of those who participate in elections **The functions of elections** - Reflecting values, desires and interests of people - Selecting qualified representatives - Providing strong and stable executive - Checking power of representatives and executive - Providing popular legitimacy **Electoral systems** - Determine the choices voters can make - How their choices are converted into the allocation of seats/offices - Three key building blocks: A. Electoral formula -- majoritarian or proportional B. Districts: a (geographic) unit in which votes are counted and seats are allotted (number of districts and district magnitude -- number of seats to be allotted) C. Legal threshold -- minimum number of votes needed to obtain a first seat in the legislature - 3 basic types: - A\) majoritarian - B\) Proportional - C\) Mix of majoritarian and proportional A. **Majoritarian systems: single-member plurality FPTP** - Highly popular with British influence (USA, Canada, India) - - **Gerrymandering=** - **Majoritatian system -- two round system -- majority voting** - First round with all candidates: if candidate win a majority, he obtains the seat - If no candidates win majority in first round, a second round follow (France) - **Majoritarian system -- alternative vote** - Single-member constituencies - Votes are able to rank-order the candidates - Less wasted votes - Australia B. **Proportional systems: list systems** - In one or more districts, more than one MP can be elected (Netherlands -- one district, Norway -- 19 districts) - Political parties present lists to the votes - Parties get seats proportional to their share of votes - Two options: **closed list system** (voters cannot change the order of candidates on the list -- Portugal, Spain) and **open list system** (voters can change the order -- preferential voting - Netherlands) - Electoral threshold: making it less easy for small parties to enter parliament - **Proportional systems: single-transferable vote** - Applies logic of alternative vote to multi-member constituencies - Voters are able to rank candidates in order of their choice - To get elected, a candidate needs a set amount of votes (quota) - Multiple people in district and 10 candidates just 5 seats and according to votes they get the seat - Surplus votes of elected candidates distributed according to their second preferences - If no more surplus votes left, candidate with least votes eliminated, and votes distributed according to second preferences - **Ireland, Malta** C. **Mixed systems** - System combining majoritarian elements and proportional representation - Italian Camera dei Deputati (147 seats elected in single-member districts by plurality, 245 multi-member constituencies by national PR, 8 members elected by Italians abroad by PR) - For example: Germany Bundestag  **The impact of electoral systems** - **DUVERGER´S LAWS** - Majoritarians systems usually result in two-party system, if parties are nationalized. Regionally concentrated parties can more easily obtain seats - PR systems usually result in multi-party system - The logics behind his laws -- demand: voters more inclined to vote for large parties in majoritarian system, to prevent their votes to be lost -- supply: smaller parties less inclined to participate in majoritarian systems, as chance of winning seats is limited - District magnitude influences disproportionality of electoral system - Underrepresented groups (minorities, women) are usually easier in PR systems, as candidates can be elected on lists -- additional measure: reserved seats (Slovenia 2 out 90 seats for Italian and Hungarian minority) **Types of political participation** - **Choosing legislative and executive officials** (voting in elections, party membership/social movements -- citizens, politicians) - **Public expression of demands** (demonstrations, boycotts - media) - **Targeted communications of demands to policy-makers** (contacting and influencing civil servant or MP, petitions -- interest groups) - Variation (over time, intensity) **What is representations about?** - Standing for (descriptive representation): representatives congruent with population in terms of gender, race, age, level of education, class... - Acting for (substantive representation): elected representatives actively promoting interests: **variation in focus** (own voters, entire population, certain group) - Various styles: -delegate (representative following voter's views) -trustee (representative following own insights after thoughtful deliberation) **Reading Questions** **1) This week\'s chapters distinguish between different types of electoral systems.** **a. What are the most important types of electoral systems?** Majoritarian, Proportional and Mixed system. **b. What impact do electoral systems have on issues such as proportionality and the representation of minorities? Also think about the role of district magnitude and legal threshold. 14** Electoral systems significantly shape proportionality and the representation of minorities in legislatures. Proportional Representation (PR) systems allocate seats based on vote shares, ensuring greater proportionality, while majoritarian systems, like First Past the Post (FPTP), often over represent larger parties and underrepresent smaller ones. Key factors include district magnitude, where higher magnitudes improve proportionality, and legal thresholds, where lower thresholds enable greater minority representation by reducing barriers for smaller parties. **c. Reflect upon the outcome of the recent US presidential elections. How did its electoral system shape the proportionality of the results?** The US Electoral College system distorts proportionality due to its winner-takes-all approach in most states. This method amplifies the influence of swing states and can allow candidates to win the presidency without securing the popular vote. For example, in the 2020 election, Joe Biden\'s electoral victory (306 votes) was disproportionate to his 4.5% margin in the popular vote, reflecting how certain states carry disproportionate weight in determining the outcome. **2) Pitkin (1967) defined 4 types of representation, of which descriptive and substantive representation are the most important ones.** **a. What is descriptive and substantive representation?** Descriptive representation occurs when representatives share the demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, age, education, religion) of the population they represent. It focuses on whether elected officials \"look like\" their constituents, symbolizing inclusivity and diversity. Substantive representation, on the other hand, emphasizes actions---whether representatives advocate for and enact policies that align with the interests and needs of their constituents, regardless of shared characteristics. **b. How can we evaluate these types of representation?** Descriptive representation can be evaluated by comparing the demographic makeup of parliament to that of society, such as the proportion of women or ethnic minorities in legislative bodies. Substantive representation is assessed by examining legislative priorities, policy outcomes, and whether they address the issues most important to the public. Public opinion surveys and voting patterns can also indicate whether constituents feel effectively represented substantively. - Statistics and implemented laws in favor, outcomes **c. Pick one EU country and reflect upon the degree to which its parliament or congress is descriptively representative and substantively representative to society.** In Slovakia, the parliament (National Council) shows limited descriptive representation, with women occupying about 30% of seats, despite comprising roughly half of the population. Representation of ethnic minorities, particularly Hungarians and Roma, is also underwhelming, with these groups often marginalized in political processes. Substantively, while policies on social welfare and labor have broad public support, minority issues such as Roma integration or LGBTQ+ rights receive insufficient attention, highlighting a gap between the legislature's actions and societal needs. **3) What are the different modes of political participation? And what are the determinants of political participation?** Key determinants include socioeconomic factors, such as education and income, which influence political knowledge and access. Psychological factors, including political efficacy and trust, affect an individual\'s likelihood to engage. Institutional factors, like the accessibility of voting systems, and cultural norms also shape levels of participation. a. **Do you think some modes of participation are more effective than others? Why (not)?** Some modes of participation are more effective depending on the context. Voting is essential for institutional change but may feel slow and indirect. Unconventional participation, such as protests, can bring immediate attention to issues but may lack sustained impact without policy follow-through. Combining modes, like protests followed by lobbying, tends to yield the most significant results. **4) What is the collective action paradox (Olsen 1956) and why does political participation occur more frequently that this theory would permit?** Mancur Olson's (1956) collective action paradox argues that individuals are unlikely to act collectively in large groups to achieve a common goal. This is because individuals can benefit from public goods without contributing, creating a \"free-rider problem.\" The cost of participation often outweighs the perceived personal benefit, leading to underwhelming collective action in theory. Political participation occurs more frequently due to several factors that mitigate the paradox. Selective incentives, such as social recognition or material benefits, motivate individuals to engage. Group identity, solidarity, and moral obligations also inspire collective action, especially when individuals feel personally connected to the cause. Additionally, effective leadership and low barriers to participation (e.g., digital tools) facilitate engagement, even when the free-rider problem persists. 4. **Parties and party systems** **Political Parties** - Edmund Burke: "a party of men united, for promoting by their joint endeavours the national interest" - Huckshorn combines 4 elements common to many definitions of parties: 1. Objective: gaining control over governmental power 2. Methods: making nominations, participating in elections and organizing government 3. Competition: contesting elections 4. Autonomy: independent competitors 5. Plus one implicit element: some level of coherence among the group of citizens, to coordinate their actions and maintain an identity - **Functions:** - COORDINATION -- within government, society, between government and society - CONDUCTING ELECTORAL CAMPAIGNS AND STRUCTURING COMPETITION -- central participants in elections, responsible for candidates and issues among which voters choose - SELECTION AND RECRUITMENT OF PERSONNEL -- candidates for elections and appointed office - REPRESENTATION -- of social groupings, citizens and their ideological positions **Types of political parties** - **Cadre, elite or caucus parties:** starting in 19^th^ century, intra-parliamentary origin, small and loose organization, limited membership, coordination within parliament, claiming to represent national interest - **Mass parties:** since second half of 19^th^ century, extra-parliamentary origin, elaborate organization with large role of party activists, part of network with affiliated organizations, large homogeneous membership, representation of interests of particular social group - **Catch-all parties:** 1950-60s to present, evolved from pre-existing parties, supporters rather than members, professionalization, reduced importance of ideology - **Cartel parties:** 1980 to present, evolved from pre-existing parties, eroding party loyalty and membership, further professionalization and limiting role party activists, governing rather than representing - **Business-firm party:** 1990 to present, extra-parliamentary initiatives of political entrepreneurs, minimal formal organization, for example Forza Italia, membership limited and irrelevant, corporate resources - **Anti-carcel parties:** 1990s to present, motivated by frustration, committed membership, ideas rather than coherent ideology **What types of party systems can be distinguished?** - **Party systems:** the interactions of parties (both competition and cooperation) in order to increase power in controlling government - **Shape of party systems:** number and size of parties (influencing the interaction between parties) - **DOMINANT-PARTY SYSTEM --** one large party, absolute majority of votes and seats, single party government, no alteration of power - **TWO-PARTY SYSTEMS --** two large parties, together around 80% of votes, single party government, altering power, republican vs democrat - **MULTI-PARTY SYSTEMS --** several parties, none approaching 50% of votes, coalition government, alternation of power via coalition changes - **BIPOLAR SYSTEMS --** two large (pre-electoral) coalitions, each capturing 40-50%, coalition government, alternation of power via change of the pre-electoral coalition   **What cleavages structure parties competition?**  **Nativism** - Only members of the nation should live within the borders of the state - Non natives constitute a threat to the members of the nation **Autoritarianism** - Society needs to be ordered hierarchically - Infringements of the existing order need to be punished (zero tolerance, law and order) **Populism** - Political representation articulated around "the people" - -antagonistic representation of social reality: people (underdog) vs. ruling elites (establishment) **France** - To won, MLP needs 50% plus 1 of all votes - No group as such is large enough - Nativist agenda is overarching, covering crime, unemployment, identity, welfare states, taxes, religion - Growing appeal of nativism - Other political cleavages (labour vs. capital, urban vs. rural) are overshadowed by the new socio-cultural conflict - Radical right seems here to stay - Which may have significant policy implications **Reading Questions:** **1) What are the four functions of parties?** Coordination: Political parties coordinate within government, society, and between the government and society. Conducting Electoral Campaigns and Structuring Competition: Parties organize electoral campaigns, present candidates, and structure political competition to offer voters distinct choices. Selection and Recruitment of Personnel: They select candidates for elections and appoint government officials. Representation: Parties represent specific social groupings, citizens, and ideological positions. **2. In the late 1960s, Lipset and Rokkan introduced the so-called 'freezing hypothesis'.** **a. What is meant by this hypothesis?** The \"freezing hypothesis\" argues that the cleavages (social divisions) that emerged during the national and industrial revolutions remained stable (\"frozen\") in structuring party systems throughout the 20th century. **b. The national and industrial revolutions produced two cleavages each. Name these cleavages and the party families associated with them.** National Revolution Cleavages: Centre-Periphery Cleavage: Central authorities versus local identities. Associated Party Families: Regional, ethnic, or nationalist parties. State-Church Cleavage: Secular versus religious authorities. -- liberal vs christians Associated Party Families: Christian democratic and conservative parties. Industrial Revolution Cleavages: Rural-Urban Cleavage: Agricultural interests versus urban industrial interests. Associated Party Families: Agrarian parties. Class Cleavage: Capital versus labor. Associated Party Families: Socialist, social democratic, and communist parties. **c. What are your thoughts on the validity of the freezing hypothesis for the second decade of the 21st century?** While the hypothesis accurately described party systems for much of the 20th century, its validity has declined in recent years. Globalization, technological advancements, and cultural shifts have introduced new cleavages (e.g., globalization vs. nationalism, environmentalism vs. traditional industries), which challenge the stability of older party systems. The rise of populist and green parties demonstrates that political competition now reflects more dynamic and fluid cleavages. **Ford & Jennings (2020) on Party System Transformations** **a. How does the urban-rural cleavage differ from the centre-periphery cleavage?** Urban-Rural Cleavage: Reflects economic and cultural differences between urban areas (often liberal, industrialized) and rural areas (conservative, agrarian). Centre-Periphery Cleavage: Focuses on power and identity conflicts between centralized authorities and regional or ethnic groups. While urban-rural divides focus on economic disparities, centre-periphery cleavages emphasize autonomy and cultural recognition. **b. Does the class-based cleavage no longer mark party systems in Western democracies?** Class-based cleavages remain relevant but have weakened in Western democracies. Economic issues are increasingly intertwined with cultural concerns, such as immigration or climate change. Traditional working-class voters have shifted support to populist parties, indicating that class cleavages have evolved rather than disappeared. **c. What drives the emergence of new cleavages, according to Ford & Jennings?** New cleavages emerge due to societal changes such as globalization, technological advancements, and demographic shifts. These factors create divisions over issues like multiculturalism, economic inequality, and environmental sustainability, which are not adequately addressed by traditional party systems. **d. Do the rise of new parties and fragmentation of parliaments result from the decline of old cleavages and the increasing relevance of new cleavages?** Yes, as old cleavages (e.g., class) become less central, new issues create political space for emerging parties. Fragmentation reflects the diversity of new cleavages, as voters align themselves with parties that address specific concerns such as nationalism, environmentalism, or digital rights. **7) What is the globalization cleavage, and how do radical-right populist parties relate to it?** The globalization cleavage divides those who benefit from globalization (urban, educated elites) from those who feel left behind (rural, less educated populations). Radical-right populist parties capitalize on this cleavage by appealing to the \"losers\" of globalization, often emphasizing nationalist, anti-immigration, and anti-globalist rhetoric. These parties frame themselves as defenders of traditional values and sovereignty against globalist elites. 6. Interest groups and social movements **Interest groups** - Bentley and Truman: associations that make claims to other groups in society - Wilson: Membership organizations that appeal to government but do not participate in elections - For example: Business Europe, Doctors without borders  **How come that interest groups exist anyway?** - Collective action problem: interest groups need support (free ride problem) - Interest groups offer also personal benefits to members such as insurance or sense of community - Misperception of costs, costs of doing nothing higher - Participation is not perceived as cost but benefit -- sense of meaning - Moreover, interest groups have other financial resources than membership fees - INEQUALITIES IN INTEREST REPRESENTATION: - Some interests can rely on more resources than others to be organized - Some interests can be influential, even if not organized (companies with exit options abroad) - Some organizations are more easily understood by government than others **Views on interest group representation** - **Republican unitarist views**: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, interest associations undermine the general will of the people by promoting sectional interests - **Liberal pluralist views:** Robert Dahl, Alexis de Tocqueville, key ideas: acceptance of conflicting interests, interest groups source of liberty, civil organizations such as interest groups are school of democracy, competing interest associations are counterweights to dominating interests, government or majority **Social movements** - Mobilized network of groups and organizations (which may include interest groups and parties) - A sense of collective identity - Aiming to bring about or resist fundamental changes in society and politics - Using mainly public and collective protest  **Potential functions of social movements** - Troblemakers - Agenda-setting, indicating problems - Providing solutions - Challenging power holder and other privileged groups in society and politics - Setting fundamental changes in politics and society in motion