Lecture 1, 2 and maybe 3

Question 1

What is a state?

Answer 1

Societies and their political organisation have evolved over time;
|
|—> Tribes without rulers;
|—> Tribes with rulers;
|—> City states;
|—> Kingdoms and empires;
|
Modern “Nation-States”: Conception (1648-1815); Consolidation (1815-1945); Erosion (1945-
today).

Question 2

Types of states - sovereignty

Answer 2

States differ in their ability to preserve their sovereignty and in the extent to which they can |
enforce law and order.
-> Strong states – can perform tasks such as defending their borders and defends their
authority from internal non state rivals.
-> Weak states – struggle carrying out these tasks and often suffer from endemic internal
violence, poor infrastructure, and weak state apparatus (tax collection, enforcement of law
and order).

Question 3

Types of states - centralising political power

Answer 3

-> Unitary states – most of their political power is concentrated in the national capital,
allocating little decision-making power to regions (may be stronger and more decisive, but
the centralisation of power might create local resentment and initiate a move towards
devolution);
-> Federal states – divide power between the central state and regional or local authorities
(often, the dispersion of power hampers national decision-making and accountability, which
can contribute to an increase in corruption);

Question 4

Features of the state - Weber

Answer 4

I. Territory;
II. Population;
III. Internal sovereignty - monopoly of force;
IV. External sovereignty - international recognition (codified in the Montevideo Convention in
1933);

Question 5

State peculiarities

Answer 5

• Supranational organizations: associations of states (EU);
• Non-sovereign territories: sub-state autonomy (Greenland, Puerto Rico);
• Partially recognised states: internal sovereignty, but contested external (Taiwan, Palestine);
• De facto states: Internal sovereignty, but little external (Eswatini, TRNC);
• Failed states: External sovereignty, but little internal (Somalia, South Sudan);

Question 6

Nation

Answer 6

An “imagined community” (Anderson) claiming sovereignty over a territory.

Question 7

Nation-state

Answer 7

conception of one state=one nation (initiated at the Treaty of Westphalia, 1648, and
French Revolution, 1789, and consolidated at the Congress of Vienna, 1815);

Question 8

Nationalism

Answer 8

ideology that contains to be a nation;
|
consequences
|
|—> State-nationalism: eradicating differences;
|—> Sub-state nationalism: secession;
|—> Multi-nationalism: federalism;

Question 9

Ethnicity

Answer 9

• Also a social construction: drawing on common descent and heritage;
• Like nationalism, its an identity invoked by elites and other participants in political and social
  struggles;
• Impossible to dissociate with nationalism;
• Within or across states;
• Does not necessarily translate into a question for political sovereignty;
• Calhoun (1993) believes that this can overlap or conflict with the nation (since nationalism often
  has an ethnic foundation);

Question 10

Did the nation create the state?

Answer 10

The answer to this depends from case to case. In Germany the nation created the state, but in
France the state created the nation.
Depends on the foundation of the nation: ethnicity; language; religion; ideals/ideology;
Determines the extent to which nations are open:
Civic Nationalism - open;
Ethnic nationalism - closed;

Question 11

Political regimes

Answer 11

Political regimes are the norms/rules of the game governing the exercise of power. In modern
political systems, this is often described in a written constitution.

Question 12

Executive political institutions

Answer 12

branch of government that carries out laws and policies, performing two separate
duties - head of state (symbolises and represents the people) and head of
government (deals with everyday tasks of running the state);

Question 13

Legislative political institutions

Answer 13

branch of government formally charged with making laws (this can be mede in
unicameral or bicameral legislatures).

Question 14

Judiciary political institutions

Answer 14

branch of a government concerned with dispensing justice in which the
constitutional court is the highest judicial body - the power of the judicial is
usually determined by the nature of its power of judicial review (concrete vs.
abstract review)

Question 15

Direct democracy

Answer 15

• People decide directly themselves;
• Difficult permanently on a large scale;
• Athenian Ecclesia (4th Century BC);
• Referendums as occasional practice;

Question 16

Representative democracy

Answer 16

Representative democracy:
* People (s)elect representatives;
* Enables democracy on a large scale;
* Schumpeter (1942): democratic elitism;
* Elections, parliaments and political parties become key institutions;

Question 17

Participatory and deliberative democracy

Answer 17

• More citizens participate;
• Still “representative” (not all citizens, but elected politicians often take final decisions);

Question 18

Majoritarian democracy

Answer 18

majority of people

Question 19

Liberal democracy

Answer 19

: as many people as possible, while respecting individual freedoms and rule of
law and protecting minorities;
|
|—> Debate reflected in virtually all democratic systems;

Question 20

Totalitarianism

Answer 20

• Attempt to transform society on an ideological basis;
• Participation encouraged or enforced - mass mobilisation;
• State controls all aspects of public and private life;
• System of terror enforced by secret police;
• Single mass party, often led by a charismatic leader;

Question 21

Hybrid/illiberal regimes

Answer 21

• In-between autocracies and democracies;
• Mostly emerged after the Third wave;
• Many varieties of hybrid regimes (regarding
  media, judicial freedom, civil rights, role of the
  opposition, etc.);
• Some countries appear to be progressing and
  others regressing;
• Often unstable and plagued by political turmoil
  (Ukraine, Indonesia, Kenya, etc.)

Question 22

What are cleavages

Answer 22

A. Social divisions creating a collective identity on each side of the divide (e.g.:
gender, age, ethnicity, …);
B. Politicised when creating divergent interests (lead to creation of parties when
elections are free);
C. Some cleavages are less (strongly) politicised (they remain dormant)
Parallel/overlapping: mutually enforce the divide;
Cross-cutting: weaken the divide;

Question 23

Historical origins cleavages

Answer 23

Importance (and sequence) of cleavage differs per country - cleavages can occur at different
times in different countries;
1. French (national) Revolution:
- Nationalism (centre vs periphery);
- Secularism (church vs. state);
- Democracy (republicans vs. monarchists).
2. Industrial Revolution: Class (owners vs. workers);

Question 24

Centre periphery cleavage

Answer 24

Originated in French Revolution as a reaction to political centralisation;
* Conflict between centre (dominant) and periphery (non-dominant) - not the same as urban/rural;
* Conflict about power, cultural rights and privileges;
* Outcomes:
|
|—> Secession (Eritrea, Ireland, Pakistan, Slovakia);
|—> Sub-state autonomy/federalism (Belgium, India, Nigeria);
|—> Absorption (France);
* Created regionalist/secessionist parties (vs. others).

Question 25

Religious cleavage

Answer 25

• Originated in French Revolution;
• Originally: new elites (secular/nationalist) vs. church - discussions about the role of religion in
  public life, especially education;
• Conflict between different denominations (e.g.: Catholic vs. Protestant, Hindu vs. Muslim);
• Created Liberal/progressive vs. Confessional/conservative parties;

Question 26

Class cleavage

Answer 26

• Originated in Industrial Revolution;
• Owners and established elites vs. Newly emerging working class;
• Conflicts about economic conditions, political rights and redistribution;
• Present in virtually all democracies;
• Created Socialist/social-democratic/communist parties vs. Liberal/conservative parties

Question 27

Ethnic cleavage

Answer 27

• Emerge in societies with diverse national and ethnic identities;
• More often in postcolonial countries;
• Can overlap with linguistic, religious, or centre-periphery cleavages;
• Conflict about cultural rights and sovereignty;
• Created ethnic parties (vs. Others).

Question 28

Ideologies

Answer 28

Ideology: collection of beliefs and values (its usually invoked to mobilise people around
cleavages);
Common heuristic: left & right;
|
|
Shifting
|
|—> Republican vs. monarchist;
|—> Progressive vs. conservative;
|—> Secular vs. confessional;
|—> State-led economy vs. Free market laissez faire;
|
|
New ideological cleavages keep emerging (globalization vs. EU-integration; Immigration vs.
Multiculturalism; COVID-19 vs. Vaccinations)

Question 29

Cleavages and political parties

Answer 29

Do parties reflect cleavages or do they (help) create them? (Lipset & Rokkan)
|
|—> In democracies, parties are the institutions that facilitate the expression of cleavages and
| conflicting interests;
|
Translation of cleavages into parties and party systems depends on:
- Legitimation (recognised opposition, rule of law, free press);
- Incorporation (franchise);
- Representation (electoral systems);
- Majority power (checks on executive power);
Rules can be manipulated to close the system for newcomers (for instance, trough redrawing
electoral districts and imposing parliament threshold).

Question 30

Electoral systems

Answer 30

Majoritarian, proportional representation and mixed systems

Question 31

Majoritarian electoral systems

Answer 31

I. Majoritarian Electoral systems - favour two-party competition
|
|—> Elections take place in single member districts (only one candidate elected);
|—> The candidate who has more votes in each district is the one elected (winner takes all);
|—> Usually used in highly populated countries
|
|
Types of majoritarian electoral systems:
A. Plurality systems (UK, Canada, Botswana, India): Voters vote for individual
candidates and the winning candidates require more votes than any other single
candidate;
|
|—> Very simple and responsive system);
B. Majority system (France, Australia): voters vote for individual candidates and the
winning candidates requires a majority of the votes that can be achievable trough
multiple rounds (Two-round system) or by the reassignment of the votes of the
lowest-placed candidates (Alternative vote);
|
|—> It requires more popular approval - leads to multi-party coalition formations;

Question 32

Proportional representation electoral systems

Answer 32

II. Proportional Representation (PR) Electoral systems (Belgium, Spain, Malta, South Africa) -
favour multi-party system
|
|—> Elections takes place in multi-member districts (more than one candidate elected);
|—> Seats allocated in a proportion to the votes received;
|—> Most used electoral system
|
|
This systems differentiate in:
* Degree of choice of candidates
- Closed list (list of parties and leaders that the voter cannot see the other candidates for
the list - South Africa and Belgium);
- Semi-open list (the voter gets the party list and can choose particular candidates that
can jump the to the top of the list and go to the parliament - Czech Republic and The
Netherlands);
- Completely open list/Single transferable vote (voters vote for individual candidates -
Ireland, Malta and Estonia);
- European countries open list (the total votes of each party determines the candidates
from each open list that are elected);
* Level of threshold (minimum percentage of votes to be eligible for seats);
* District magnitude (size of the multi-member districts - as big the size of the districts is the
more representative the system is);
* Formula for seat allocation (the mathematical formulas that translate on the seats in
parliament usually favour smaller or larger countries);

Question 33

Mixed systems

Answer 33

III. Mixed systems (Japan, Hungary, Thailand, South Korea; Germany) - favour multi-party
system;
|
|—> Systems that combine features from both systems;
|—> Parliament is divided from candidates elected by votes for a party and for regions;
|—> Mix between a majority system and a PR system;

Question 34

Liberal parties

Answer 34

• Origins: 19th century, after the French Revolution;
• Initial alliance with socialist parties;
• Advocate: Secularism; Individual rights and freedoms; Free market capitalism; Globalization;
• Two strands: left & right;
• Differ in size, but frequently in government;

Question 35

Conservative parties

Answer 35

• Origins: 19th century, after French Revolution;
• Advocate: Interest of privileged classes; Traditional values; Resistance to social change; Law
  and order; Small state & fiscal austerity;
• Functional equivalent of Christian-democracy;
• Not present everywhere, but strong when present;

Question 36

Religious/confessional parties

Answer 36

• Origins: mid-19th century;
• Mobilisation in response to secularism or result of religious divide;
• Advocate: religious rights; religious values; economic centrism.
• Present in most countries with religious communities;
• Largest party family center-right - often in government;

Question 37

socialist/social-democratic parties

Answer 37

• Origins: late 19th century;
• Established to represent working class;
• Ideological moderation, inclusion after WW2;
• Advocate: mixed economy; welfare state; globalization.
• Since 1990s: identity crisis (in Europe);
• Present in almost all countries around the world;

Question 38

Communist parties

Answer 38

• Origins: split after Russian Revolution (1917);
• Decline after Cold War, but still strong in some democratic countries (France, Italy), present
  in many CEE countries and in one-party states (China, Cuba, Vietnam);
• Almost always excluded from government;
• Advocate: working class; against free market/capitalism; against EU-integration/
  globalization;

Question 39

Green parties

Answer 39

• Origins: late 1970s or 1980s;
• Advocate: environmentalism; international peace; social justice; human rights.
• Small but increasing support;
• Have sometimes been in government;

Question 40

Radical/Far-right parties

Answer 40

• Origins: post-WW2, but stronger since 1990s;
• Reaction to immigration and multiculturalism;
• Advocate: nationalism; nativism and anti-immigration; anti-globalization; populist
  democracy;
• Now present in most European countries;
• Mostly excluded from government;

Question 41

Freezing hypothesis (Lipset and Rokkan)

Answer 41

—> Alignment (party identification on the basis of cleavages structures and ideologies);
|—> Realignment (shifting party identification through changing cleavages or dramatic political
| system change);
|—> Dealignment (declining party identification that is not replaced with new ones);
|
leads to
|
|—> Political apathy & cynicism.
|—> Decreasing turnout and party membership.
|—> Personalistic & anti-system voting.
|—> Electoral volatility.
|—> Decreasing legitimacy of (democratic) political system.

Question 42

Silent revolution

Answer 42

• Value change in postindustrial democracies (Inglehart);
• Shift from material to post-material values;
• Post material values prominent among younger and wealthier voters;
  |
  |—> Post-material value: Democracy; Human rights (women, LGBTQ); Environment; Pacifism.
  |
  Party system change (emergence of the New Left parties);

Question 43

Transnational cleavage

Answer 43

• Hooghe & Marks (2018) believe this is a response to immigration;
• Based on the winners vs. The losers of globalization;
• Focus on: culture and nationalism; immigration and multiculturalism; globalization;
  majoritarian vs. Liberal democracy;
• In some countries: absorbed by existing party system (US and UK);
• In others, emergence of new parties (France);
  |
  |—>Brought political dealignment, which increased electoral volatility;

Question 44

Cleavages in new democracies

Answer 44

Bornschier (2009) believes that in theory: cleavage concept should travel well to new
democracies;
|
BUT
|
|—> New democracies often don’t have the kind of cleavages of the West;
|
due to…
|
|—> No large-scale processes of change or upheaval;
|—> No contestation for suffrage rights;
|—> Greater role of individual politicians;
|
Results:
- High electoral volatility;
- Personalistic politics;
- Patron-client linkages;
- Clientelism (reciprocal relation between patron, politician, and client, voter, where the client
offers patron political support in exchange for benefits - like jobs, food, money, permits,
loans, etc.);
|
|—> Strong negative connotation (seen as anti-democratic and corrupt);