Comparative Politics Midterm Revision PDF

Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki SESSION 1 Introduction to the course's objectives, requirements, rationale, and participants Chapter 1: Introduction to Comparative Politics Comparative politics This field of study describes, explains and predicts political structures and proc...

Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki SESSION 1 Introduction to the course's objectives, requirements, rationale, and participants Chapter 1: Introduction to Comparative Politics Comparative politics This field of study describes, explains and predicts political structures and processes within political systems. It examines power relationships and political decision-making. The research can be synchronic, meaning it looks at a single point in time, or diachronic, meaning it analyses change over time. The state It is the entity where sovereignty resides and authoritative decisions are made. Institution that has the power to create laws, enforce them and provide public services (healthcare, education) The five I’s Institutions: The formal and informal rules that structure political behaviour Interests: The motivations of political actors, including both individuals and groups Ideas: The influence of ideology, beliefs and values on political behaviour. Individuals: The role of leadership and personal agency in shaping political outcomes. International environment: The impact of global factors on domestic politics Goals of comparative politics 1. Description: Classifying and describing political systems → different types of electoral systems 2. Explanation: Understanding why certain political phenomena occur. a. Revolutions happened in France and Russia but not in Germany 3. Prediction: Using existing knowledge to predict future political trends. a. Predicting how changes to electoral laws might affect party systems. Types of Comparative Politics Single-country studies: Minimal comparison between countries and systems Methodological tradition: Focuses on creating tools and standardised ways to compare political systems Analytical tradition: Using data to compare systems side by side The substance of comparative politics Looking at how power relationships affect political decision-making systems.  Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Examines the state and integrates domestic and international factors to recognise how globalisation influences internal politics. Traditions in comparative politics Aristotle: The first to analyse political data across city-states and classified governments into kingship, aristocracy and constitutional government Machiavelli: Known for comparing government types SESSIONS 2 & 3 The approach and methods of comparative politics Chapter 2 "Approaches in Comparative Politics" (Comparative Politics) Comparative Politics Comparative politics is the study of comparing different political systems to better understand how they work. Examine the differences and consider the interplay between individual behaviour and broader structures. ○ Rational choice theory: individuals make decisions to maximise their utility ○ Cognitive political psychology: mental processes shape political attitudes and behaviour. Perspectives in political theory Positivism: Objective and measurable facts Constructivism: Subjective and socially constructed nature of knowledge Theories Theories provide frameworks for understanding complex systems and offer systematic ways to analyse and compare political phenomena across different countries. ○ Consocialionalism: A theory explaining how societies with deep social divisions manage conflict through power-sharing arrangements The problem with the Five I’s They can lead to biases in research where researchers might search for evidence that supports their pre-existing theories. Triangulation: employing multiple theories, methods and data sources Good science Theoretical clarity: Clearly articulated Testable hypothesis: Specific, testable, logically derived from the theory, falsifiable and non-trivial Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Rigorous methodology: Research designs should produce internally valid conclusions, quantify uncertainty and have some external validity. Transparency: Data should be open and accessible Ethical standards: Researchers should adhere to principles of informed consent, privacy, confidentiality, harm minimisation, etc. Social relevance: Research should contribute to society The main threats to credible causal claims Confounders are variables that are correlated with both the outcome and the treatment, making it challenging to isolate the true effect of the treatment. Reverse causality occurs when the outcome is also a cause of the treatment, leading to ambiguity about the direction of the causal relationship. The concept of ceteris paribus is important for making causal claims. It means holding all other factors constant to isolate the relationship between the treatment and the outcome. ○ Various methods, including process tracing, controlled case comparisons, statistical models with controls, quasi-experiments, and experiments, can help achieve this. Experiments are considered the gold standard for causal inference because they randomly assign the treatment, ensuring that treatment and control groups are comparable. This minimizes the risk of confounders and reverse causality.  Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki SESSIONS 4 & 5 The Nature, Formation, and Development of States ​ Chapter 4 "The nation-state" (Comparative Politics) ​ & "The origins of the modern state" (Foundations of Comparative Politics) State characteristics Territory: states have defined borders and control over the resources within them. They do not just possess the territory but are the territory themselves. Sovereignty: States have ultimate authority within their territory. Monopoly of Legitimate Violence: States have the exclusive right to use force within their territories, and any unauthorised use of violence is typically suppressed. Theories of state formation and development offer different perspectives: Hobbes sees the state as a solution to the “state of nature”, where individuals are motivated by self-preservation and live in fear of violence. The state provides security and order through coercion and the threat of punishment. Tilly focuses on the historical processes of war-making and resource extraction as key drivers of state formation. He argues that states emerged due to the need to finance and wage wars, leading to the development of institutions for taxation, administration, and military organisation. Aspect Hobbes’s Contractual View Tilly’s Predatory View Core Theory Contractual Predatory Main Idea State forms through a voluntary social State forms through coercion and contract resource extraction Origins of the To escape chaos (the "state of nature"), Rulers compete for power and State people surrender rights resources, leading to state formation Role of the Individuals seek protection by agreeing Individuals are subjects from whom Individual to a sovereign rulers extract resources Source of Consent of the governed Military and economic power Sovereign’s Power Key Social contract for protection, War making and resource Mechanisms enforced by a powerful sovereign extraction lead to state institutions Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Purpose of the Protects citizens from harm, ensuring Extracts resources to maintain State order and stability power, provides protection as needed View on State Based on individual consent Based on power and resource Legitimacy control Historical Less focus on historical cases Strong use of historical examples Emphasis (e.g., Congo case study) Famous Quote N/A "War made the state, and the state made war." - Tilly Analytical Normative (how states should form) Descriptive (how states actually Approach form) The coordination problem and Hobbes People are driven by self-preservation, and there is no higher authority to enforce rules or protect them from harm The logic of self-interest: even though everyone would benefit from a peaceful society where nobody steals or kills, individuals are incentivised to act in their own self-interest. Suboptimal outcome: This leads to a chaotic and violent society The state as a solution: Hobbes believes that by introducing a sovereign with the power to enforce laws and punish wrongdoers, the state creates an environment where individuals can trust that others will also abide by the rules. War Making, State Formation and the Mafia Analogy War Making and Extraction: Tilly emphasizes that war-making forced rulers to develop effective mechanisms for extracting resources from the population to fund their armies and maintain their power. This extraction could take various forms, including taxation, conscription, and confiscation of property. The Cycle of War and State Building: This need to extract resources for war-making, in turn, led to the development of state institutions and practices. As Tilly states, "War made the state, and the state made war." He sees this as a cyclical process: the more successful rulers were at war, the more resources they could extract, the stronger their state became, and the more effectively they could wage future wars. → if states could defend themselves, they would be strong Protection, Adjudication, and Production: To enhance their ability to extract resources, states engaged in activities like: ○ Protection: offering protection from internal and external threats, both to secure the population's loyalty and to ensure the continued production of resources. ○ Adjudication: developing legal systems and courts to resolve disputes and maintain order, creating a more stable environment for economic activity. ○ Production: investing in infrastructure and promoting economic growth to increase the pool of resources available for extraction. Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki States as Protection Rackets: Tilly uses the provocative analogy of states as "protection rackets" or "organized crime" to highlight their coercive nature. He argues that states, like criminal organizations, use their power to extract resources from the population, often under the guise of providing protection. This comparison underscores Tilly's view that states are not inherently benevolent entities but rather self-seeking organizations that use their power to pursue their own interests. → states are like organised crime rings, they offer protection but are inherently violent in their approach. Rejection of the Social Contract: Tilly's theory explicitly rejects the idea of a social contract as the basis for state legitimacy. He argues that states emerged not from voluntary agreements among individuals but from the imposition of power by rulers on subjects. According to Tilly, power makes the state, not the goodness of the people. Categorising Theories of State Formation → beyond Hobbes and Tilly Revenue-Seeking Rulers: The complex relationships between the state and those who control essential resources. Theories within this category might examine how states bargain with elites, extract taxes from different social groups, or manage natural resources to generate revenue. Inter-State Conflict: The role of military and political conflicts among rulers in shaping state formation and development. They might examine how competition for territory, resources, or strategic advantage drives state-building, military innovation, and the expansion of bureaucratic capacity. Intra-State Conflict: Relationships between different societal actors within a state and how these relationships impact state building. For example, these theories might analyze conflicts between landed elites and urban merchants, different religious groups, or ethnic factions and how these conflicts influence the state's structure, policies, and capacity. Ideas: The role of ideas and ideologies in shaping state formation. Theories in this category could focus on the influence of nationalism, liberalism, developmentalism, or other political ideologies on the design of state institutions, the goals of state policies, and the relationship between the state and its citizens. Geography: The impact of geographical factors on state building. These factors might include physical geography (e.g., mountains, rivers, coastlines), economic geography (e.g., resource distribution, trade routes), political geography (e.g., proximity to powerful neighbours), and ethnic geography (e.g., the distribution of different ethnic groups). The relationship between state and society is complex and dynamic: The public sphere is where citizens can engage with the state, express opinions and hold the government accountable. Citizenship grants individuals rights and obligations within the state, fostering a sense of equality and belonging. Nationhood promotes a sense of shared identity and solidarity amongst citizens, often based on common cultural or historical factors. Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Social cleavages (race, class, ethnicity or religion) can create divisions within society, leading to conflict and challenges to state authority State expansion and the role of the state States have expanded their role in regulating economic activity, providing public services and addressing social inequalities The bureaucratic state is characterised by hierarchy, specialisation, and the rule of law. Rationalisation describes making state institutions more efficient, impersonal and predictable. State expansion can lead to challenges such as bureaucratic efficiency, the influence of special interest, and the blurring of lines between state and society. State capacity This refers to a state’s ability to perform its functions effectively Coercive Capacity: Enforcing order and deterring crime Extractive Capacity: Collecting taxes and managing resources Coordination capacity: Organising collective action and providing public goods Compliance capacity: Ensuring citizens accept and cooperate with state authority Legibility under state capacity This refers to the state's ability to understand and categorise its population and their activities. This makes it easier to extract resources, coordinate activities, and enforce compliance. Measures of legibility include ○ The quality of census data The quality of the census is a strong predictor of taxation and the provision of public goods. SIMPLE EXPLANATION: Legibility refers to how well a state can “see” or understand its population and its activities. The better the government knows its people—through things like census data, records, and categories—the easier it is for the state to carry out its functions, such as collecting taxes, providing services, and enforcing laws. Historical development of states Consolidation of Rule: Characterised by the expansion of territorial control and the establishment of a monopoly on violence Rationalisation of Rule: Marked by the development of centralised, hierarchical, and bureaucratic structures that make governance more efficient and predictable. Expansion of Rule: This involves the state taking on a wider range of functions, including regulating the economy, providing social welfare, and promoting national unity. ○ This expansion is driven by various factors, including administrative growth, pressure from social groups, and political strategies. The problem of state expansion The expansion of state activities has blurred the lines between the state and society. Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki The state now plays a significant role in regulating the economy and providing for the welfare of its citizens. Understanding the Congo Case Study and Regression Tables The Congo case study provides empirical support for Tilly's predatory view of state formation. It focuses on the activities of armed groups in the context of valuable mineral resources. Setting: Eastern Congo, an area rich in coltan and gold, is a resource that is highly sought after in international markets. Actors: Armed groups, including rebel groups and militias, operate in the region, competing to control mining areas and the revenue generated from these resources. Events: The study examines how these armed actors responded to exogenous shocks in the prices of coltan and gold. The price increase strongly incentivizes these groups to expand their control and extraction activities. Key Findings: ○ Coltan Price Shock: As the price of coltan rose, armed actors established monopolies of violence in mining areas. They created illegal customs posts to tax mining output and also provided some protection to miners. ○ Gold Price Shock: The rise in gold, a resource easier for miners to conceal, led to the emergence of stationary bandits in the villages where miners lived. These bandits imposed taxes and sought to control the flow of gold from the villages. ○ Welfare Effects: The study found that the presence of a stationary bandit with a broader mission that encompassed the population's well-being (such as a popular militia or elements of the Congolese army) increased household welfare. This suggests that these actors, while engaging in predatory behaviour, also provided some level of public goods and services, potentially as a way to secure their control and legitimacy. ○ Differential Effects of Minerals: The study highlights the contrasting effects of the gold and coltan shocks. Gold shocks, because they increased the need for banditry in villages, led to the intensification of militia functions, including developing more sophisticated tax systems, work permit requirements, and the emergence of rudimentary fiscal and judicial administration. In contrast, coltan shocks, which were concentrated in mining areas, had the opposite effect, likely because the armed actors focused more on direct control of the mines themselves rather than the broader population. The ones camped out for the gold needed to control the population, while the coltan miners only cared about controlling the mines since they weren't camping out. Supporting Tilly's Theory: These findings align with Tilly's emphasis on the role of coercion and resource extraction in state formation. The armed groups in the Congo case study, much like the rulers Tilly describes, used violence to establish control, extracted resources from the population, and provided a limited degree of protection and services to strengthen their rule. Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Regression Tables: Unveiling Associations and Potential Causal Effects Dependent Variable (Y): The outcome being explained or predicted, typically shown at the top. Independent Variables (X1, X2, etc.): Variables explaining Y's variation listed in rows. Coefficient: Indicates the strength and direction of each variable's effect on Y. Positive values suggest a direct relationship; negative values indicate an inverse relationship. Standard Error: Shows uncertainty in the coefficient estimate; lower values mean higher precision. p-value: Indicates statistical significance (often below 0.05), with stars often marking significance. N: Total observations in the model, typically noted at the bottom. Interpreting Regression Coefficients: Association vs. Causation: Regression coefficients show associations, not causation. A positive link between education and income doesn’t confirm that education causes higher income; other factors may influence both. Confounders: Establishing causality requires ruling out confounding variables that impact both the predictor and outcome (e.g., innate ability in education-income studies). Experiments for Causality: True causality is best shown through randomized experiments or quasi-experiments that mimic random assignment. Connecting Regression Analysis to the Congo Case Study: Dependent Variable: Household welfare (measured perhaps by income, consumption, or a composite index) Independent Variables: Presence of a stationary bandit (coded as a dummy variable, 0 for absence, 1 for presence), type of bandit (e.g., popular militia, Congolese army, rebel group), mineral price shocks (measured as a percentage change in price), and control variables (e.g., household size, education levels, access to infrastructure). Insights on Organized Crime in Latin America Challenge to State Authority: A state’s legitimacy relies on its monopoly over violence. Organized crime disrupts this by using violence to control areas, enforce rules, and profit, often weakening or replacing state authority, especially in regions where state control is already limited. Crime in Weak States: In failed or fragile states—where core functions like law enforcement and basic services are lacking—organized crime thrives, often stepping into roles typically filled by the state. Parallels with Tilly’s Theory: Organized crime groups, like states in Tilly’s model, use violence and extract resources. They may also provide protection or services, strengthening their control and local support in weak-state regions. Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Importance of State Capacity: Strong state capacities in coercion, resource extraction, and coordination are vital to counter organized crime. Low capacity creates vulnerabilities that criminals exploit. Using Regression Analysis: Regression analysis could help explore the conditions fueling organized crime, analyzing links between crime rates and factors like state capacity, poverty, and political instability. This method shows associations but doesn’t prove causation; careful study designs are needed to clarify causal relationships. SESSIONS 6 & 7 Regimes: Authoritarianism, types, and survival Chapter 8 "Varieties of Dictatorship" (Foundations of Comparative Politics) Defining Authoritarian Regimes: Authoritarian regimes are characterized by a lack of free and fair elections where multiple parties compete for office, an absence of key freedoms such as freedom of expression and association, and the concentration of power in a single individual or a small group of elites. Classifying Authoritarian Regimes: There are various ways to classify authoritarian regimes: ○ Totalitarian vs. non-totalitarian: Totalitarian regimes seek to control all aspects of society, while non-totalitarian regimes may allow for some limited freedoms. ○ Personalist vs. single-party vs. military vs. monarchical: This classification focuses on the key actors who hold power within the regime. ○ Closed vs. electoral authoritarian regimes: This distinction highlights whether the regime holds elections, even if they are not free or fair. Types of Dictatorships ○ Monarchy: Power is inherited and passed down within a royal family, with legitimacy often stemming from tradition or religious authority. Examples include Saudi Arabia and Brunei. ○ Military Dictatorship: Controlled by military officers or factions, often coming to power through a coup. Civilian rule is limited, and the military may promise a transition to civilian rule but rarely delivers. Examples include Egypt and Myanmar. ○ Civilian Dictatorship: Non-military, non-monarchic regimes where power is held by civilians. They are further subdivided into: Dominant-party dictatorship: Power is concentrated in a single political party that dominates the political system. Examples include China and Cuba. Personalist dictatorship: Power is concentrated around a single leader who often controls both the state and the military. Cults of Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki personality often develop around the leader. Examples include North Korea and Turkmenistan. Electoral Authoritarianism: A form of dictatorship where formal democratic institutions exist, but the ruling party or leader manipulates them to maintain power. Elections are held, but they are not free or fair. The opposition may be allowed to exist, but it has little chance of winning power. ○ Types of Electoral Authoritarianism: Hegemonic electoral regimes: One party completely dominates, and no meaningful competition exists. Elections are a mere formality used to provide legitimacy to the regime. Examples include Russia and Zimbabwe. Competitive authoritarian regimes: Elections are more competitive than hegemonic regimes, but the playing field is still heavily tilted in favour of the incumbent. The opposition has some ability to challenge the ruling party, but electoral fraud, media bias, legal barriers, and repression limit their chances of success. Examples include Turkey and Venezuela. Politically closed authoritarian regimes: There are no meaningful elections or democratic institutions. Power is maintained without any electoral contest, and the regime does not even attempt to legitimize itself through elections. Examples include North Korea and China. Key Challenges for Authoritarian Regimes: ○ The Dictator's Dilemma: Authoritarian leaders face the challenge of maintaining control through repression while also needing to be informed about their regime's true level of support. Repression creates fear and discourages people from expressing their true opinions, leading to a lack of accurate information for the dictator. ○ The Problem of Authoritarian Power-Sharing: Dictators must balance the distribution of power and resources among key allies and elites who help sustain the regime. If elites feel sidelined or threatened, this can lead to internal conflict. ○ The Problem of Authoritarian Control: Authoritarian regimes must control the broader population and prevent mass unrest or opposition. This is often achieved through repression, propaganda, and limited participation, but these strategies can also lead to instability and resentment. Selectorate Theory: This theory explains how political leaders maintain power by managing the size and composition of three groups: the disenfranchised, the selectorate, and the winning coalition. ○ Disenfranchised: The portion of the population with no formal role in selecting or influencing the leadership. ○ Selectorate: The group of people who have a role in selecting the leader or influencing political outcomes. ○ Winning Coalition: The subset of the selectorate whose support is essential for the leader to stay in power.  Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Key insights of selectorate theory: Leaders in regimes with small winning coalitions focus on distributing private goods (money, benefits, privileges) to satisfy their core supporters. Leaders in systems with large winning coalitions provide more public goods to appeal to a broader base. The winning coalition's size plays a crucial role in determining how resources are allocated and what strategies leaders use to stay in power. Leaders in systems with large winning coalitions are incentivized to implement policies that benefit the broader public, as their political survival depends on gaining the support of a wide population. Leaders in regimes with small winning coalitions focus on enriching their inner circle, which can lead to corruption and inefficiency. Loyalty Norm: The degree to which a leader depends on their winning coalition for survival and how difficult it is for coalition members to switch sides or defect. ○ Leaders with small winning coalitions often have high loyalty norms, as the benefits for coalition members are closely tied to the regime's survival. ○ Leaders with large winning coalitions often have lower loyalty norms, as individuals can more easily switch allegiances without severe personal consequences. ​ SESSIONS 8 & 9 Regimes: Democracy, democratization, and survival ​ Chapter 5 “Democracies” (Comparative Politics) ​ Chapter 7 “Democratic Transitions” (Foundations of Comparative Politics) Defining and Conceptualizing Democracy Democracy is a multifaceted concept with various interpretations. Some view it as direct participation, representation, majority rule, fairness, empowerment, rule of law, good governance, or equity. Political science aims to define democracy objectively, separating it from normative judgments. This involves procedural definitions that focus on processes of elite power and substantive definitions that emphasize rights, accountability, and citizen agency. Key thinkers offer different procedural perspectives: ○ Schumpeter sees democracy as a competition among elites for votes, where voters' primary role is to choose a government. Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki ○ Dahl contrasts democracy (an ideal type) with polyarchy (existing regimes with high inclusiveness and competitiveness). He stresses citizen ability to formulate, express, and have preferences weighed equally in governance. ○ Przeworski defines democracy by the uncertainty of election outcomes where parties accept defeat due to the possibility of regaining power later. Measuring Democracy: Importance and Challenges Measuring democracy is crucial for policy decisions by governments, international organizations, and other actors, as well as for monitoring democratic quality and supporting democratization efforts. However, measurement is complex due to the contested nature of democracy, its multidimensionality, and the difficulty in quantifying aspects like competition, rights, and rule of law. Aggregating indicators into a single measure also poses challenges. Several prominent measures exist, each reflecting different conceptualizations, data sources, coverage, aggregation methods, and goals: Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem), Freedom House (FH), Polity, Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index (EIU), Regimes of the World, and Bertelsmann Stiftung's Transformation Index. Emergence of Democracy: Theories and Challenges Acemoglu and Robinson's theory posits that democratization arises when citizens with revolutionary potential secure democracy to lock in their power, influenced by factors like civil society strength, economic shocks, inequality, and wealth types. Dahl's polyarchy theory emphasizes the costs of tolerating versus repressing dissent. He suggests that opening competitiveness before inclusiveness allows elites to adapt to competition in a safer environment. Various explanations for democratization exist: modernization theories, civic culture theories, dissent theories, economic bargaining theories, and group-based theories. Challenges in identifying democratization drivers include: ○ Distinguishing drivers of emergence from those of survival ○ Addressing confounding variables ○ Accounting for reverse causality ○ Recognizing the varying influence of factors across contexts. Waves and Reversals: Democratic Backsliding Democratic backsliding involves state-led weakening or elimination of democratic institutions. Contemporary backsliding differs from Cold War patterns: ○ Fewer military coups and executive coups ○ Less election-day fraud ○ Increased strategic harassment and disqualification of opposition ○ More executive self-aggrandizement. Backsliding's evolving nature makes identification and resistance harder.  Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Elites play a crucial role in backsliding: autocratic leaders can emerge subtly, parties act as gatekeepers, backsliding often occurs progressively, and law and culture are tools for both protecting democracy and weakening autocracy. Key Insights Political science attempts to understand democracy objectively, with Schumpeter, Dahl, and Przeworski offering valuable perspectives. Measuring democracy is complex, resulting in diverse scores and classifications based on varying approaches. Understanding the emergence and erosion of democracy requires testing various theories empirically. SESSIONS 10 & 11 Representation: Parliamentarism and Presidentialism ​ Chapter 10 "Parliamentary, presidential, and semi-presidential democracies" (Foundations of Comparative Politics) Forms of Government and Their Classification Three main types of democracies: The sources primarily focus on distinguishing between parliamentary, presidential, and semi-presidential democracies. These systems are categorized based on two fundamental questions: the government's responsibility to the legislature and the method of electing the head of state. Classifying based on legislative responsibility: A crucial factor in differentiating these systems is legislative responsibility. This refers to the legislature's power to remove a government from office without cause. Parliamentary and semi-presidential democracies exhibit this feature, allowing the legislature to hold the government accountable through a vote of no confidence. Classifying based on the Head of State: The second defining characteristic is whether the head of state, often a president, is directly elected by the people for a fixed term. If so, it suggests a presidential or semi-presidential system. The sources caution against relying solely on titles, as some parliamentary systems, like Germany and India, also have presidents, but their roles are largely ceremonial. Parliamentary Democracies: Key Features and Dynamics Government formation and composition: In parliamentary democracies, the government, comprising the prime minister and cabinet, is accountable to the legislature. The prime minister, typically the leader of the majority party or coalition, forms the cabinet. The process of forming a government often involves negotiations  Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki between parties, especially in cases where no single party holds a majority. Coalition politics: The sources emphasize the significance of coalition governments in parliamentary systems. Different types of coalitions emerge, including: ○ Minimal winning coalitions (MWC): These involve the smallest number of parties needed for a legislative majority. ○ Surplus majority coalitions: These coalitions have more parties than required for a majority, potentially enhancing stability. ○ Minority governments: These lack a majority but can function if opposition parties don't unite to remove them. Government duration and stability: The lifespan of governments in parliamentary systems is influenced by factors like coalition stability, economic performance, and internal party dynamics. Minority governments tend to be less stable due to their reliance on external support. Presidential Democracies: Key Features and Dynamics Separation of powers: Presidential democracies feature a distinct separation of powers. The president, directly elected by the people, holds significant executive authority, including appointing the cabinet and vetoing laws. Cabinet composition and role: Unlike in parliamentary systems, the presidential cabinet in these systems doesn't require legislative approval and is directly accountable to the president. Depending on the president's political strategy and the prevailing circumstances, presidential cabinets can be partisan, technocratic, or even coalition-based. Semi-Presidential Democracies: Blending Features Hybrid nature: Semi-presidential democracies combine elements of both parliamentary and presidential systems. They have a directly elected president with fixed terms and a prime minister and cabinet responsible to the legislature. Cohabitation: A unique feature of semi-presidentialism is the possibility of cohabitation, where the president and prime minister belong to different political parties. This power-sharing arrangement can lead to either cooperation or conflict between the two executive figures. Comparing and Contrasting Systems Advantages and disadvantages: The sources acknowledge each system's merits and drawbacks. Parliamentary systems are often praised for flexibility and responsiveness to changing political landscapes, while presidential systems are noted for clear lines of responsibility and electoral accountability. However, the sources also highlight the "perils of presidentialism," such as the potential for political  Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki deadlock and a tendency toward "winner-takes-all" politics, as articulated by Linz (1990). Context matters: The sources emphasize that the effectiveness of any governmental system is contingent upon a country's specific circumstances and historical context. There isn't a universally "best" form of government; the choice depends on various factors, including the country's political culture, social cleavages, and institutional development. Additional Considerations Selectorate theory: The sources briefly touch upon selectorate theory when discussing legislative coalition building. This theory analyzes political behaviour based on the size of the selectorate (those who can influence leader selection) and the winning coalition (those whose support is necessary for a leader to stay in power). Cabinet types: The sources provide a detailed breakdown of different cabinet types beyond the major governmental systems. These include single-party majority governments, minimal winning coalitions, single-party minority governments, minority coalition governments, and surplus majority governments. Each type has implications for government stability and policy-making. Real-world examples: The sources utilize examples from countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain, and Brazil to illustrate the concepts and dynamics of different governmental systems. These examples provide practical context and highlight the nuances of how these systems operate in reality. SESSIONS 12 & 13 (LIVE IN-PERSON) Representation: Elections and electoral systems ​ Chapter 10 "Elections and Referendums" (Comparative Politics) ​ Chapter 11 "Elections and Electoral Systems" (Foundations of Comparative Politics) Elections are the foundation of any democratic system. They allow citizens to express their political preferences and make their voices heard by choosing representatives to govern on their behalf. Elections serve practical and symbolic roles: legitimising authority, providing representation and accountability, and educating and engaging the electorate. Electoral Systems are laws and regulations governing electoral competition between candidates and parties. They determine how votes are translated into seats in a legislative body and influence party systems, government stability, and representation. Comparative Politics Midterm Revision Erica Njoki Electoral Integrity refers to the extent to which elections meet international standards and global norms. Electoral malpractice, such as ballot stuffing, electoral violence, and voter intimidation, can undermine electoral integrity and have serious consequences for democracy. Majoritarian Systems are electoral systems where candidates or parties that receive the most votes win, even without an absolute majority. Examples of majoritarian systems include: ○ First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) where the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins. It encourages a two-party system and is simple to understand but can lead to wasted votes and unrepresentative outcomes. ○ Single Non-Transferable Vote (SNTV) where voters cast a single vote for one candidate in a multi-member district. It can lead to strategic voting and disproportionate outcomes, favoring larger parties. ○ Alternative Vote (AV) where voters rank candidates by preference. If no candidate wins a majority, the lowest-ranked candidate is eliminated, and their votes are redistributed until one candidate secures a majority. ○ Two-Round System (TRS) where a second round of voting is held between the top two candidates if no one wins a majority in the first round. This system ensures a majority winner but can be time-consuming and expensive. Proportional Representation (PR) Systems are designed to allocate seats in proportion to the votes each party receives. They aim to ensure that the elected representatives reflect the diversity of political views within the electorate. Key concepts within PR systems include: ○ District Magnitude: The number of representatives elected per district. Larger districts tend to produce more proportional outcomes. ○ Electoral Threshold: A minimum percentage of votes a party must receive to gain representation. ○ Types of Party Lists: Closed List: The party ranks candidates, and voters choose the party. Open List: Voters can influence the ranking of candidates within a party. ○ Single Transferable Vote (STV) is a PR system where voters rank candidates. Seats are filled by meeting a quota, and surplus votes are transferred based on voter preferences. Mixed electoral systems combine elements of majoritarian and PR systems. Voters typically cast two votes, one for a candidate in their district and one for a party list. This aims to balance local representation with proportional outcomes.