Comparative political systems. Gabriel Almond.

Political system = system of action=interaction of roles. Structure = pattering of interactions. System = patterned actions for making decisions.

Political roles=how affect others. Role (independent) – the unit of the political system/+affect the system. Ex. executive bureaucracy  legislative bureaucracy+pressure groups

Political system has meanings and purposes: identity, values etc.

Orientation: ideology. Perception, affect, evaluation (Parsons and Shils).

Political party. Totalitarianism. Anglo-American examples.

Classification of political systems:

1. Particularistic (American Government, Soviet Union, British Government)

2. Regional (Latin America)

3. Political (Colonial Government, British Commonwealth)

4. Functional (European-American area)

Or

1. Anglo-American (+Commonwealth)

2. Continental European (except Scandinavia and Low Countries)

3. Pre-industrial or partially industrial

4. Totalitarian political systems

The Anglo-American political system:

-pragmatic and homogeneous. Freedom, mass welfare, security.

-secularized political system. Roles are autonomous.

-division of labor

American system similarities: complex, stable, manifest and predictable. Mass communications, centralized net.

Pre-industrial political systems:

Westernized+other. Mixed system of political cultures  unpredictable.

5 factors of erosion of traditional culture  nationalism, problems of communication:

-the type of traditional cultures involved

-introduction of Westernization

-functions of Westernized society

-tempo and tactics of the Westernization process

-introduced Western cultural products

Role structure: unstable role structure (+parties), bureaucracy may take over the legislature and army, no division labor, traditional role mixed with another  mixed political role structure

Totalitarian political systems:

Synthetic homogenous. Center controls communication, system of organization. Through modern technology of violence, bureaucracy (absolute power) monopoly, dictator’s independence.

Role structure: 1) predominance of the coercive roles, 2) functional instability of the power roles.

Continental European Political systems (Fr, Ger, It):

Survival of older cultures+sub-cultures. Developmental patterns.

Sub-cultures: 1) pre-industrial (Catholic element – Church), 2) middle class (conservative or socialists), 3) industrial.

Role structure: 1) alienation from political market, 2) not adapted political system.

Political Man: the Social Bases of Politics. Chapter II. Economic Development and Democracy. Seymour Martin Lipset.

Capitalistic industrialization  democracy (Weber. Ex. Germany). Categories: less & more democratic.

Max Weber and Schumpeter about political system. Conditions:

1. Political formula: institutions, parties, press etc.

2. Set of leaders

3. Set of recognized leaders

Need:

-value system (if not  chaos. Ex. Latin America)

-effective authority group, stable, responsible

-effective opposition

-social condition: education (more income and various occupation). But Germ, Fr high ed. but it did not stabilized democracy, ed. is not sufficient condition for democracy)

-economic development: wealth (radio, tel.), industrialization (agriculture), urbanization (% of population)

D. Lerner. Key variables in modernization:

Urbanization, literacy, voting rates, media consumption, production and education. Ex. Turkey and Lebanon – control of power by elections. Egypt is more urbanized, better base for modernization than L.

Literacy and media  spread of literacy  political participation (voting)

Class struggle: higher income, economic security, education.

-New Zealand, UK, Sweden, Denmark, AU, NW, BG, LX Netherlands - >$500 per capita. Catholic democracies are wealthy. 1) Distribution of consumption goods, 2) little difference in standards of living with adjacent social classes, 3) bigger middle class.

-FR, CZ, FN, HG, IT, Austria - <$500. Soviet occupation countries GM+Austr. <$500. Iceland and FN communists movements.

-Poor countries: 1) tradition-dominated societies, 2) parties are more extremist and radical, 3) big gap income between professional and semi-professional.

Tocqueville “mass society” theory. No multitude of organizations independent of central power have revolutionary potential.

Pressure of rapid industrialization.

Denmark – slow. Sweden – rapid. Norway – chemical industry. Young migration.