PS 230 Intro, Theories, Levels Flashcards
Politics
using power to get people to do things they would not otherwise do (the study of power) + arts/ science of government.
Sovereignty
supreme power or authority. The sole legitimate right to use violence within a given geographic area - no higher power acknowledged.
International Relations #1
Politics in the absence of a common sovereign.
Anarchy
no higher authority (you are sovereign)
International Relations #2
the factors and the activities which affect the external policies and the power of the basic units into which the world is divided (Stanley Hoffmann)
States
Most possess some form of government, must have territorial integrity, must have population (people), must have sovereignty, and states dominate the study of international relations.
Treaty of Westphalia (1648)
It established the principle of sovereignty, it created the principle of non-intervention, created the idea of legal equality among states, created the principle of a binding international treaty, and the treaty recognized the right of the ruler in each land to control their religion for the territory.
Nations
a population that shares identity, usually including a language and culture” (Goldstein)
“a collection of people loyal to each other because of perceived ethnic, linguistic, or cultural affinity” (Mansbach)
-Cultural instead of geographic
-Shares a common identity
Nationalism
“devotion to the interests of one’s nation” (Goldstein)
“the set of psychological, cultural, and social forces that drive the formation of a nation and sustain national identity” (RSK)
Offensive Nationalism
Belief in the superiority of your nation
Defensive Nationalism
Belief in preserving your culture
Nation State
-“synonymous with “state” or “country,” but with the added implication that the subject population identifies itself as a nation”
-A country that has one nation inside of it. Culture and politics are aligned.
Ex: Japan
IGOs
-Inter Governmental Organization
-International groups made up of states
Ex: 1804 Central Rhine Commission
(Increase trade and solve problems on the rhine river)
-Usually there to solve a problem and make something very narrow function
Ex: -United Nations (largest IGO has a global scope) -NATO
NGOS
-Nongovernmental organization
-Do not have states as their membership
-Crossing international borders but no state members
-Redcross, Green Peace
MNCS
Multinational Companies
Businesses that do business in multiple states
-Cross international borders in the business that they do
-Not a government, not individuals.
-British East India Company was first
-Ex: General Motors (GM), Walmart’s, Target, big companies
Why do these IGO, NGO, MNCS, factors engage in IR?
Interest: Want to promote and protect their interest.
Ex: security or medical purposes or rights
Prosperity: Want to make more money and improve.
Prestige: Look and be more powerful and important in the international world.
Ex: North Korea, Iram, ect.
Higher Callings: Promote higher things and advocating for things
Ex: Human rights, democracy, ect.
How do these groups achieve these goals? (IGOS< NGOs, MNCS)
-Diplomacy: Direct official communications between representatives of international actors
-Has to be official approved communication and usually is to solve some sort of crisis
Examples of Diplomacy
Ex: Bargaining, negotiations, threats or promises or statements of resolve
Resolve is all about being credible.
Examples of specific kinds of diplomacy
Ex: Henry Kissinger (worked for Nixon) Shuttle Diplomacy (Israles and Arabs) He played messenger between Saudi Arabia to Israel to Syria since they would not meet.
Nixon focused on Soviet Relations and used Linkage Politics. Nixon linked two separate issues together (an area where he is weak together with an area he was strong) and he would negotiate them together.
Economic Strength
States employ economic strength through Sanctions.
Sanctions
Deliberate government action to inflict economic deprivation on a target state or society through the limitation or cessation of customary economic relations.
Ex: Thou shall not trade x with state x (ex: Cuba sanctions)
Downsides of sanctions
(Sanctions rarely harm the military power of a state ex: North Korea is under many sanctions for a while, but the military is fine, “soldiers well-fed but people are starving”)
How can sanctions have an effect?
Sanctions have an effect if they are threatened, but not imposed. Everyone must participate.
Military Force
Resorting to organized violence to achieve your goals or interests.
Who has a right to employ violence?
only states can result in the use of force. States have a right to employ force.
-States can declare war, corporations cannot. States have the capacity to do this.
Downside to military force
Cost. It is the costliest of options of how to combat an issue, War is very expensive.
When is force successful?
When your state is stronger technologically and physically and materially and has a better economic base. Better morale and motivation from the people give a boost to winning a war. Strategic position is also important to winning a war, where you are placed geographically (ex: U.S. protected by oceans, no big threats, ect.)
Domestic Politics Vs International Politics
IP there is no rule against the use of force. Nothing can stop that. Disputes in IR last hundreds of years
domestically we seem to have a sense of community and understand better. (ex: democrats or republicans are still Americans)
Why should you care about international relations?
- Economics
(Gas cost, Food, Jobs) interdependence - Environment
(Almost all of these issues are IR) - Hazardous to your health
(Wars, Terrorism)
Does the U.S have less reason to care?
Yes, compared to others.
-Geography
Geographic isolation allows us to separate from rest of world and worry less.
-Culture
We left Europe in order to get away and have nothing to do with rest or the world. Why start now when our historical roots are this way?
Results or U.S. having less reason to care
Hard to get the U.S. to go to war.
We need to be attacked or Moral justifications Ex: (Need to defend democracy, protecting human rights, war on terroism )
Elements of social science
description, explanation, prediction, prescription
Description
what do we see? Ex: Trade, Terrorism, war
Explanation
Why?
Hypothesis
Law
Theory
Hypothesis
tentative statement about a causal relationship.
One thing leads to another.
Ex: Why do states go to war? Why do they trade?
What does all good research start with?
The word why
Law
Once a hypothesis has broad support or is deemed correct, it becomes a law.
Does not happen very often.
Theory
Collection of assumptions, laws, and empirical evidence used to explain a phenomenon.
What we build in order to explain why the world works the way it does. The answer to the why?
Theories are NOT truth, but instead stories we tell in order to help us understand complex events.
Why is there terrorism? How does power influence war?
Are theories truth?
No
Are theories simple and narrow?
Yes there is no complexity.
What makes a good theory?
- Theories are interested in central tendencies (trying to explain behaviors on average)
Large number of cases trying to be explained by one theory. - A good theory is progressive and leads to new questions.
- A good theory should be parsimonious (as simple as possible, not hyper complex) least info, but explains the most.
- Clear specification of relationships.
Ex: Increased trade amongst democracies decreases war
Prediction
Known in advance when something will happen
Prescription
What should we do? How can we avoid this?
(ex: predict war, how can we avoid it? Or here’s how you can spread democracy)
Go to policy makers and give them a prescription.
In IR where are we currently?
between explanation and prediction.
Types of theories:
Normative theory, Grand Theory, Partial or Mid-range theory.
Normative theory
Values or value preferences
They will tell you how the world should be. an ideal world.
Grand theory
large theories that try to explain IR as a whole in a broad range.
Partial or Mid-range theory
they focus on one area.
Themes & Characteristics of IR Scholarship
Generality, cooperation/conflict, competing theories
Generality
Central Tendencies
Cooperation/Conflict
(scholars who study cooperation do not mesh together with those who study conflict) Birds of a feather flock together
Competing theories
(Many theories compete to explain phenomena and answer questions, it is up to how you interpret it.) Generally, there is not a single right answer but there are wrong answers.
Paradigm
comprehensive framework for the identification of the variables about which the theory is to be developed.
world view
Idealist/ Utopians assumptions
the environment shapes human conduct
-believed humans are naturally peaceful at heart
moral based
Theories of IR
emphasized how IR should be.
Realism
Direct reaction to idealism
Assumptions of Realism
Human nature is aggressive.
-We’re power seeking and sinful fallen creatures
-We are imperfect, but we are imperfectible
-Our states are rational actors (You look at all your options and choose the one that achieves your goal)
Realist view of anarchy
they see the conflictual and chaos of anarchy continual struggle for power.
Realist on power
the strong will do what they will the weak will do what they must
(Realist) all states are sovereign.
but not equal (power is distributed unequally within the world)
Realism unitary actor
our states speak with ONE voice.
Realism- Domestic politics and ______ are distinct from each other
International relations
-Realist see it as Zero-sum competition
(The more power I have, the less you have)
Realist believe states are
principal actors (Focus on states because they have the power)
Realist believe our states are rational actors
(You look at all your options and choose the one that achieves your goal)
Realists believe we are always trying to maximize
their national interest
Realist dominate issue
National security (keep yourself safe) - big military
Realist measure events based on
safety/ national security
Realist major policy:
balance of power
Realist major thinkers:
Thucydides, Morgenthau, Henry Kissinger
Idealist measure events against
international law
Idealist main concept
national self-determination (all nations should have their own government and get to vote which would elect peaceful governments)
Idealist are
moral based
Idealist major thinkers
Major thinkers- Kant, Woodrow Wilson
Idealist strongly
wanted to create international organizations (IGOS).
Realist rationality
The goal does not matter. We judge how people go about making their decisions.
Realist major policy
balance of power
Realist believed
Give up mortality from politics
Liberalism
Critiques of realism
Liberalism main ideas
-Shifts our focus back to society and cooperation
-Believe Anarchy has order and organization
-Liberals believe that there are norms on how states should behave
-They believe there are Hedgemons that are powerful and vital to IR
Liberalism unitary actor
Liberals like to focus on policies inside a state and say domestic politics matter to international relations.
-Liberals say Supranational actors
(mncs igos) serve a purpose in international relations
Because they provide information
(ex: someone is threatening to attack you, send info to igos, igos investigate state, receive information on what state has or can do to you)
Liberals believe
the rational actor model isn’t important because states are not very good at maximizing their interests.
Liberalism on state preferences
no one preference dominates states . Different states want different things at different points in time. What a state deems to be important can change over time.
Liberalism idea on war
War is not a good tool. War is not a good way to achieve goals.
Liberalism believes humans and nations
Humans/nations are not just self-interested: We can change over time/ We can think about others. Altruism is possible.
Core assumptions of Liberalism:
Primacy of societal actors, Representation and state preferences, Interdependence and the international system
Primacy of societal actors
-The fundamental actors in international relations are individuals and private groups
-They view people as rational and risk averse
-They get these goals by organizing and promoting our differentiated interests
(Join or create groups to help us get what we want) Groups are political parties usually
Representation and state preferences
-State preferences are determined by a subset (small group) of people in society
-The ones that win the domestic battle (election) gets to determine state preferences
-Who wins and loses determines what the states want and what is important to them
Interdependence and the international system
The configuration of interdependent state preferences determines state behavior.
-Ex: what if I want to control Antarctica and so does another state? Will result in fighting
If you want to control it and I do not? We will be peaceful.
Preferences put together determine behavior.
Realism focuses on
power- can you get it?
Liberalism focuses on
goals- what do you want?
Liberalism Major thinkers
Bob Keohane, J.S. Mill
Marxism
Radicalism
Assumptions of Marxism
Class Conflict, Base/Superstructure, Non-neutrality of the state
Class Conflict
-different classes constantly in conflict (two different classes)
Which class you belong to is defined by your relationship to the means of production.
-Bourgeoisie: The rich. Own land and or have a lot of money.
-Proletariat: Workers. Sell labor to the bourgeoisie.
-You work for the bourgeoisie, but they make all the money. Uneven distribution of benefits.
Base/Superstructure
-The economy is the base in every society. Superstructure: The economy determines everything (religion, government, education, ect.)
Marxist on Religion
They believe religion was created to keep the workers working. You don’t worry about your economic sufferings so that you don’t rise up.
Non-neutrality of the state
-The government is not neutral. It represents the powerful (Bourgeoisie) and nobody else.
-Economic power determines political power. Bourgeoisie is always the winner, and the government will follow the policies that advance their interest.
Marxist Major thinkers
Marx, Lenin, Wallerstein
Weaknesses of Marxist Theory
Communist/ Socialist Behavior:
Behavior did not change. Socialist states went to war with each other.
Contradictory explanations: How is war good for the bourgeoisie, not always consistent with beliefs.
Critical Theories
Feminism and Constructivism
Critical Theory
stands apart from the prevailing order of the world and ask how the world and asks how that order came about
Explanatory theory
takes the world as it finds it, accepts the prevailing order
Feminism
-Focuses on individuals and groups
-Specifically gender or gender differences
-Gender differences are socially constructed’
Feminism believes
the idea that women and men are not born behaving differently. Gender differences are socially constructed. The behaviors are learned. We repeat what we see, and it teaches us how to act and we then take on identity structures.
Where do social constructs start
This starts at home, you copy your mom or dad. Parents start to treat their children differently based on gender. “Tough boys and pretty girls”
Feminism focuses on
Masculinity vs Femininity
Masculinity = power, autonomy, rationality, public
Femininity= weakness, dependence, emotion, private
How is Feminism IR?
scholars of feminism use it to understand IR
Assumptions of Feminism:
The international/state system is based on gender roles and reinforces them.
Feminism view anarchy
Anarchy means state must defend themselves
In order to defend yourself, you need good fighters
Masculinity and the tough little boy idea provides good fighters.
People (usually men) that have the aspects to fight and protect our power are given social stature.
However, this creates social inequality.
Strong leaders keep you safe and they are masculine strong leaders. Masculine features and traits are taken more seriously. Feminists want to know
why is this a requirement? why is only masculinity and toughness associated with power?
-When we elect all tough masculine leaders everywhere, everyone is tough, and the world becomes
more conflictual.
-Feminist would say to end this cycle we must
elect nonconflictual leaders (sneaky complex theory of the world)
Major thinkers of feminism
Ticker, Goldstein
Constructivism
-Takes feminism one step further
-Focuses on all identities are socially instructed (not just gender)
-Identities serve three purposes
-Identities serve three purposes
Tells you who you are
Tells others who you are
Tells you who others are
Intersubjective agreement
This all only works if we all agree on the roles were in and the meaning of those roles
How is constructivism IR?
Elite identity
The identity that these elites adopt determines how they will behave
Collection of identities determine what the world will look like
Identity types:
Self-interested states
Great power
European Union Member (will cooperate more)
Democracy (protect other democracies)
Protector the free world
Example of identities in IR
Ex: China has decided they are a great power and feel as if the world does not treat then as such. They do stuff to simply get attention to be treated as important.
Main idea of construtivism
Identities change how people/states behave
Major thinkers of constructivism
Wendt, Kratochwill
How to bring about change?
Get people to change their identities
Weakness of critical theory
-Non-falsifiable. It can’t be proven wrong.
Weakness of Constructivism
It takes a behavior, action, and then looking backwards to see what caused it.
You can never predict.
4 main levels of analysis:
Domestic
State
Dyadic
Systemic
Domestic:
-Looks inside of a state.
-Looking at individuals, groups of people, and domestic politics inside the state.
-Focuses on proximate cause.
What happens just before the war started or just before something happened?
-The match that starts the fire
State:
-State as a unitary actor
-Characteristic of state that makes it behave the way it does
Ex; Geographic location
Dyadic:
-Focuses on comparison of two states to make an explanation
-Dyad = pair
-Shared behavior or interests that explain how the states behave
Ex: two democratic states are very unlikely to go to war.
^that is a dyadic explanation
Systemic:
-How the international system shapes the behavior of states.
-How the forests explains the trees
-Most abstract level of analysis
-Underlying causes (the environment that helps create those events)
-What were the conditions?
The level of analysis problem of IR:
-Which level is best for explaining international relations
-Ex: Realist focus on domestics or state
-How you think the world works (ex liberalism) and ___ it works by a level of analysis
Ex: the Sunday afternoon painting explains the level of analysis, you focus on the dots or the entire picture.
Biggest level:
System level
System
System- collection of actors (states, IGOS, etc.) and the relationships between them and the underlying structures or patterns of the IR world.
System level
believes that the structure of the system constrains state behavior.
You want to do something, but the system and structure of it constraints your behavior.
Ex: The structure of the room constrains you from going through a wall rather than walking around and out the doors.
You cannot overtake the world because the system wont allow it.
The system is
unintended, it is not designed.
System properties:
Two given properties
given
true, the way it is. Always there, always will be.
Anarchy
They see the system as being in a state of anarchy.
Mandatory membership
You have to be a member of the system. You cannot opt out, everyone is a member of IR.
Assessed properties.
-Two assessed properties ( they change through time and you must assess them)
As these properties change, they alter state behavior and IR changes.
The two assessed properties
Power distribution and Alliance Structure
Power distribution
How is power distributed within the system?
One dominant state? Everyone weak? Many strong states?
Alliance structure
Who is aligned with who? Who are allies?
How strong are their relationships?
The assessed properties together determine the
plurality of the system/structure. Then we can base predictions on this.
Different types of structures:
Unipolar structure
One dominant power or group of states/allies (But it is not a world empire.)
A huge strong power that has a gap between everyone else, BUT they are not strong enough to conquer everyone else.
Ex: The way the world worked after the soviet union, America is an example of this.
Hegemon
the really powerful state.
Cycle
throughout history every hundred years a state becomes a hegemon that is dominant but falls eventually.
Hegemonic Stability Theory
What does the world look like when you have a dominant state?
The one dominant state provides stability and prosperity.
Ex: it brings global peace, free trade, and deal with all the annoying threats (non-state actors that are violent or terrorist groups)
Why does this happen?
Public Vs. Private goods
Public vs. Private Goods
Public goods are non rivalrous and non excludable.
(I can’t stop you from using it and you can’t stop me from using it- non rivalrous)
Private goods are excludable and if you are using it, I can’t use it. You can also keep me from using it.
Ex: private property
The ultimate public good is seen as peace
Free rider problem
: you enjoy the benefits of other people’s work without bearing any of the cost of paying for it.
Problem is (free rider)
we want peace but it comes at a cost. There is no natural incentive to provide public goods. Private goods make money.
Solution (free rider)
coercion- I can make you pay for these goods. I can coerce you to pay.
Ex: Taxes (gov. Forces you to pay for public goods)
Other solution
the hegemonic stability theory.
the hegemonic stability theory.
The hegemon provides these goods (peace, stability, free trade) but don’t do it for altruism (hey that’s a good thing i’ll do it) uses their dominant position and provides these because the peace and stability and free trade provides them with benefits that outweighs the cost it takes to provide them.
Peace is good for trade so they provide a peaceful world and then they benefit from it.
They provide public goods because it is within their best interests to do so.
Bipolar System
-two dominant states
Two views on bipolar system
Zero sum competition and Mutual gain from collusion
zero-sum competition
If there are two of us and I take some, theirs less for you. Constant conflict in order to get more.
A bipolar world would be very conflictual.
Mutual gain from collusion
Two powerful states could get together and divide the world up and divide the world up amongst themselves. Peaceful and no fighting.
Issues with bipolarity
Not very many cases to look at historically and How to measure stability and cooperation
-Not very many cases to look at historically.
There are two. 1. Cold war (Us and soviet union) (athens and sparta)
Can’t compare 1950’s to 500 B.C
Hard to determine which is correct
How to measure stability and cooperation
Do we consider the cold war peace and stability?
Hard to measure considering there was no cooperation between either examples.
Hard to compare.
Multipolar system
-5 or more major powers
BOP- Argues that the multi polar system will be peaceful. As one state rise to threaten others, everyone else will band together and fight that power and the other state will give up. Everyone can keep each other in checks
Offensive/ defensive advantage
The idea that the area it is either easier to attack someone or it is easier to defend an area
offensive
-Chain gang and passed bucks
States form tight alliances in order to protect themselves
Problem: when one war starts it becomes a large war because the alliances are tight. Ex: NATO
Defensive
Pass bucks
States wall themselves off from everything that has happened and feel as if they do not have to deal with any threats so you pass the buck and allow someone else to deal with this threat and it eventually grows large.
Ex: french border
Complex interdependence
Roots in liberalism
The relationships of two states and an IGO
But there are multiple overlapping relationships.
Ex of Complex Interdependence
Ex:
State 1- realism- State 2
A- state 1 can bypass gov interact directly with society 2
(ex spread of democracy)
B- IOS bypass gov and interact directly with society 2
C- Society 1 bypass own gov and seek aid from an IGO
Ex: citizens of states in europe can bypass them and go directly to EU
D- IO’s to states
Ex: IF makes loans to states to carry out economic development projects
E- Society 1- E- Society 2 (transnational movements)
F- State 2- IO states can go directly to a IO
Ex: Ukraine and nato
Liberals say
realism is limited
Meaning of interdependence
Sensitivity- how quickly you feel the effects of an event that happened around the world
Vulnerability- how great is that affect upon you
Political
-Transnational organizations
Ex: environmental groups, terrorists, etc.
Is interdependence increasing?
Sensitivity is
Vulnerability is state by state.
(u.s. Not as vulnerable as in the past)
Systemic Analysis
it’s inclusive/ it covers all relationships
It’s parsimonious (not very complex)
Weaknesses of Systemic Analysis
-deterministic: no role for free will to be made, it says this is the way it’s going to operate. The scope cannot change.
-Dearth of detail: It is inclusive but does it at such a high detail that it has to cut out so much detail and what we normally think of us as politics. (ideology, elections, etc.)
-Black box the state: we must assume that all states behave the same. Non democracy or democracy does not matter it states that the state will always act the same and have the same goal
Dyadic level (dominant mode of IR) PAIRS
-two states comparing and contrasting only two states
Look at shares of features or lack there of and how they behave towards each other
Ex: do they share this trait?
Shared Regime type:
Two democracies very unlikely to fight each other
Two authoritarian states next unlikely to fight
Other comparisons- religions, culture, power, alliances.
Balance of Power- how relative their power is to each other
if state a’s power is roughly equal to state b they are more likely to be peaceful and not go to war together
Strength and Weakness of Shared Regime
Strength:
-Parsimonious
-State not a black box
Weaknesses:
-Deterministic
-Not inclusive (focuses on only two states and leaves out everyone else)
State/ Societal Level
-specific state characteristics on their own, not in comparison to anyone else
-only talking about that state
Regime type:
-Democracies behave differently
Ex: Democratic states win more wars.
(no comparison just flat more likely to win)
Democratic states are more peaceful
(not true just as willing to go to war as others)
Major powers:
-characteristic
How do big states behave differently than weaker states?
Major powers are more likely to be involved in wars
Geography:
-State level factor
Conditions in which geographical location matter
Ex: Landlocked state- has now access to ocean and have all borders
You will see their policy being driven to try and gain access to the ocean.
Ex: Russia is almost landlocked so they try to gain land in south by ocean
Ex: if ukraine can take away Russian ports they believe Russia will give up and let war go
Revolutionary/ Post rev. States
-They try to export revolutions and start supporting other revolutionary agendas
-Risk accept: More willing to roll the dice and take a gamble on something.
-More likely to engage in international conflict
-Tend to alter balance of power in areas
-Friend may change to your enemy or you may change the states around you
-Revolutions alter relationships
Strategic culture:
different states have different predominant strategic preferences that are rooted in the early or formative experiences of the state. (Johnson 1995)
-long term and embedded within the being of the state. Past experiences of a state can determine how they act. (pyscho analysis) Mix or IR and PS
Ex: United states
Geography- two oceans, no general fear or invasion. Safe and secure on our soil.
Culture- formed separating from Europe , fleeing warfare in EU, bias against foreign involvement
Effect- isolationism. We do not intervene unless we must because we are the unipolar major power. Ex: nobody wants to be involved in Ukraine. It is hard to get the United States to go to war, a pearl harbor type of event must happen for us to get involved. Must have a moral component.
Ex: Russia
Geography- has been invaded by Mongols, Poles, Swedes, Germans, EVERYBODY
-Ruled by strong autocratic leaders
-Economically underdeveloped
-Effect- power seeking - authoritarian - favored offensive
-Very power-seeking, use a realist lens because they have been invaded
–They continue to seek authoritarian leaders for strength
-Belief that Russia needs a strong leader in order to stay safe and protect security.
-This is why they tolerate Putin because he has kept Russia safe
-Russia is the attacker, the striker first, start the war
Ex: Germany - warrior culture
-More war prone
-Their lineage comes from Knights so they seem themselves as defenders of the realm
-Junkers
State Level
-Strengths: permits differentiation/ looking at differences between states
-Weaknesses: Distortion- takes minor difference between states and build them up to make it a big important thing how do we know which ones matter?Outside Forces-ignoring the rest of the forest and focusing on one tree/ limitations , and Objective/ Perception does your objective reality or your perspective or reality take over? Which one is driving the State. Perception vs. reality. Ex: Weak leader may think they are strong and go to war and lose.
One state =
state level of analysis
Domestic
-focuses on sub-state actors (individuals, groups)
-Looking inside of the state
-Micro
Public Opinion:
Range of views on foreign policy issues held by citizens of a state
Types of public opinion:
Fundamental- something that is deeply embedded in our belief structure ex: Nationalism or belief of free trade in the U.S.
Short-term- fluctuates rapidly and changes quickly. Usually support of a specific policy. Ex: Public Moon
Elite- deal with different groups. Key policy makers, lobbyists, and big journalists. Inform upper level thought.
Activists- People that are very involved in topic areas. Special interters. Foreign policy special interest groups. Their opinions do not reflect general societal opinions. They are biased to a specific policy outcome that usually helps them.
Mass Public- The average citizen’s opinion. Usually more focused on domestic policy and usually concerned with foreign policy. Will focus on ir though when something like 9/11 happens. Tends to be very fickle and change fastly.
2 way relationship b/w state behavior and public opinion.
Opinion of people drives gov behavior
Gov helps shape opinion and sway public opinion through release of info
Rally around the flag
phenomenon whereby large segments of the public express support for the President’s policies in any crisis situation, regardless of the substance of the policies,
Example of Rally around the flag
Ex: Democrats rally to a republican president vice versa.
Public Opinion is shaped by international events
Diversionary Theory Leaders use the rally round the flag effect to divert attention from domestic problems.
Leaders use the rally round the flag effect to divert attention from domestic problems.
(Weak to no proof that it actually occurs) Popular in entertainment, weak in scientific.
-A manufactured crisis by leaders diverts attention from scandals or weak economy ect.
Example of Diversionary Theory
Ex: falcons war in 80’s. Argienta was failing so the generals invaded the falcons islands (controlled by England). The British decided they wanted to keep the island and mobilized and Argentina lost the war.
Ex: Once sex scandal happened to Clinton, the administration started launching attacks on terrorist groups the very next day.
Political parties
aggregation of interests
-candidates: parties run candidates to gain control of gov. and be the ones in charge. Very calculated to increase chances of winning. Broad sense of interests.
Ex: do not talk much about foreign policy in campaigns.
Interest groups
shared common interest in a political decision.
-focused on the narrow sense of issues
-They lobby for their specific interests through candidates and get them to support their side/ view.
-They buy time for facetime with the candidate’s/ policy makers to provide them with information (policy briefs) to get them to agree.
-They have ONE concern.
Example of Interest groups
NRA is in guns
Policy briefs
1 way lobbyists get information to policy makers
Influence of lobbyist
-it’s hard to measure their exact influence. It varies based upon the issue.
Ex:during military crisis it’s hard for lobbyist to influence but long term issues like trade policies have high influence
Types of Lobbyist:
Purposive and Redistributive groups
Purposive
They want a specific outcome.
Redistributive
They are trying to redistribute national income. Ex: taking money from one side and moving it to another. Focus heavily on economic issues.
Most well known Redistributive group
American Israel Public Affairs Committee: well organized + well funded. Increase support for the state of israel for the American population.
Example of lobbyist
Military industrial complex profits from war so they encourage militaristic solutions to US problems because they gain money
-coined by eisenhower (even though he was once a military general he did not support it and said it drives us to be more involved in conflict)
A specific example of an Iron triangle
Iron Triangle
money moves through each of the three points. Called this because it is very hard to break these relationships. Ex: in order to change policy you have to break this movement of money.
Three points of Iron Triangle
Interest group, Congressional Committee, Bureaucracy
How Iron Triangle functions
-Interest group: gives money to candidates
-Congressional Committee: the committee members than support increase spending in the policy area of the interest groups
-Bureaucracy: that money directly goes to government spending and they buy stuff from the groups that support that special interest group. (hard to prove)
Revolving door
The same people work together but their places within the iron triangle can rotate.
Ethnic groups
a lot of theories we will see self- determination
Irredentism
special subset of nationalism that is the desire to reclaim lost territories
(Goal- reclaim lost ethnic territory)
Want area back, ethnic drive can make a state behave in a type of way
Cost Benefit analysis
Group Decision Making
Rational Actor
lay out your options and choose the one that leads to the goal or outcome wanted
Organizational Process Model
Decided to look at outputs (decisions of large groups)
-Satisficing vs optimizing we find the first decision that is good and enough and that is the one we pick. Saves time.
-Avoid uncertainty: emphasize choices that have clear outcomes
Leads to SOP Standard Operating procedures.
SOP Standard Operating procedures
They provide information on what decision you should make now based upon the history of what has happened/ worked in the past.
Speeds up decision making but are very slow to change
Ex: cuban missile crisis quarantine
Still lacked some
Bureaucratic Politics Model
mini political battle inside big parts of government
-pluralism at the top
-Role vs personality: Personal relationships between officials matter for policy outcomes. These people may argue what is good for your group (ex department of defense) not necessarily what is within the best interests of the state.
Where you sit determines where you stand, views or outcome are driven are determined by the role/ job your in
-Occasionally people jump out of their roles during a crisis
This is all a part of “Going Native”
“Going Native”
Overtime when stepping into a role you become loyal to who you represent, so president put procedures into place in order to keep his group loyal to him rather than organizations or positions
Group Think
-groups make better decisions than individuals is the usual thought, but groupthink says groups make worse decisions than the individual because social dynamics cause one or two people dominating the group.
The group shuns you if you don’t go along with the group, so everyone usually agrees with the group.
The group starts to ignore information that does not agree with it’s idea
Groups starts to pressure any dissenters to conform and join the group
Subordance (people working for you) stop questioning the group dynamics
Ex: Battle of stalingrad
How to fix group think
Rotate members of the group.
Assign a devil’s advocate to bring rational arguments and data
Secret ballots ( not knowing who voted yes or no)
Weaknesses of group think.
-Argument by examples (hard to test in broader scientific way)
-Backward reasoning (they all start with a mistake and work backwards until they find groupthink, can’t predict)
Individuals
Cognition
the process by which we acquire knowledge
Bounded rationality
we cannot make rational choices due to our limited mental capacity so we create very simple decision rules to allow us to make hard decisions in life
Simple decisions rules
Party ID
cognitive Dissonance
humans cannot stand inconsistencies. So if our actions are inconsistent with our beliefs then it will drive us insane. To fix it you do not change your behaviors, instead you change your beliefs.
