%%{init:{'flowchart':{'useMaxWidth':true},'themeVariables':{'fontSize':'22px'}}}%%
flowchart LR
A["1. Formulate<br/>a Question"] --> B["2. Build a<br/>Theory"]
B --> C["3. Derive<br/>Hypotheses"]
C --> D["4. Test<br/>Hypotheses"]
style A fill:#ffffff,stroke:#4a7c6f,stroke-width:2px
style B fill:#ffffff,stroke:#4a7c6f,stroke-width:2px
style C fill:#ffffff,stroke:#4a7c6f,stroke-width:2px
style D fill:#ffffff,stroke:#4a7c6f,stroke-width:2px
Comparative Politics
Lecture 1: Introduction to Comparative Politics
Learning Outcomes, Skills, and Themes
Learning Outcomes of the Course
By the end of this course, you will be able to:
- Engage critically with core political questions
- Use the comparative method for political topics
- Evaluate theories and research methodologies
- Connect theoretical arguments to empirical evidence
1. Engaging Critically with Questions
We will cover thought-provoking questions such as:
- How did states form and why do some remain weak?
- How do colonial legacies persist today?
- What makes democracies emerge, survive, and die?
- How do institutions shape who gets what?
- When does ethnicity become politically dangerous?
- How does populism erode democracy from within?
2. Using the Comparative Method
We will explore topics using comparative analysis:
- Compare state formation across Europe, Africa, Latin America
- Evaluate colonial legacies using cross-national evidence
- Analyze how electoral rules shape party systems
- Compare democratic erosion across countries
You will learn to identify what makes a comparison informative and what makes it misleading.
3. Understanding Pros and Cons of Theories
We will investigate theoretical frameworks, including:
- Modernization theory vs. credible commitment theory
- Primordialism vs. constructivism for ethnic identity
- Economic grievance vs. status threat for populism
We will examine different methodologies:
- Instrumental variables (Acemoglu, Johnson & Robinson)
- Regression discontinuity designs (Dell)
- Natural experiments (Posner)
4. Theoretical Arguments and Empirical Evidence
We will evaluate how theories apply to real-world cases:
- Apply Tilly’s “war made the state” thesis and test its limits
- Use Acemoglu & Robinson’s framework for democratization
- Assess how electoral rules shape policy outcomes
- Evaluate populism’s role in democratic erosion
Skills You Will Gain/Enhance
- Critical Thinking: evaluate theories and methodologies
- Analytical Skills: formulate and answer research questions
- Effective Communication: articulate ideas verbally
- Cultural Awareness: examine politics across Europe, Latin America, Africa, East Asia, the Middle East
So What?
These skills and outcomes structure the entire course.
But first: how is this course organized, and what is expected of you?
Logistics
Logistics
- Hours: MW 8:30–9:45 AM
- Room: Frohring Campus, Second Floor, Room 5
- Office Hours: By appointment
- Grading: Presentations, midterm, and final (each 33%)
- Textbook: No required book; Principles of Comparative Politics (Golder et al.) recommended
- If you have issues finding materials, email me
Weekly Questions
Students must submit two questions via email by 10:00 PM the night before discussion class.
- Each question: 50–150 words
- Engage with the readings critically
- Reference a specific part of the text
- Formulate a question encouraging deeper analysis
Send questions directly in the email – no attachments.
Example Question
Mahmood Mamdani in his book Citizen and Subject takes into account the issue of the bifurcated state. He claims, “How can a tiny and foreign minority rule over an indigenous majority?” The answer is direct and indirect rule. Direct rule was a European initial response to the problem of administration; no native institution would be recognized, and only those who were civilized would have access to European rights. In contrast, indirect rule became a mode of domination over the peasantry where the land remained a communal possession and there was a reconstruction of the tribal leadership as the hierarchy of the local state. Do you think that the role of the European state over the colonized is the cause of the state of backwardness of the countries in Africa and in South America?
Presentations
- Basics: 10–15 min with introduction, main points, conclusion
- Visual Aids: legible slides, relevant visuals, no overload
- Critical Analysis: go beyond summarizing – discuss limitations
- Preparation: practice, stay within time, avoid reading verbatim
- Engage: be ready for 2–3 questions from peers
Course Contents
| Week | Topic |
|---|---|
| 1 | Introduction to Comparative Politics |
| 2 | State Formation and State Building |
| 3 | Colonial Legacies |
| 4 | Conceptualizing Democracy |
| 5 | Democratization |
| 6 | Democratic Backsliding |
| 7 | Autocracies |
| 8 | Revision & MIDTERM |
| 9 | Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Political Identity |
| 10 | Electoral Systems |
| 11 | Political Parties and Party Systems |
| 12 | Federal Arrangements |
| 13 | Corruption, Clientelism, and Accountability |
| 14 | Competition, Populism, and Democratic Erosion |
| 15 | Revision & FINAL EXAM |
So What?
Now that you know the logistics and the roadmap, let’s ask:
What is comparative politics, and why does it matter?
Comparative Politics
What Is Comparative Politics?
- A subfield of political science
- Systematic study of political systems across countries
- Goal: identify patterns, similarities, and differences
- Analyze causes and consequences of political variation
Comparative Politics vs. International Relations
Comparative Politics
- Looks within countries
- Institutions, regimes, behavior
- Why does X vary across countries?
International Relations
- Looks between countries
- War, trade, diplomacy
- How do states interact?
They overlap – but the unit of analysis differs.
Key Aspects of Comparative Politics
- Institutional Analysis: legislatures, executives, electoral systems
- Political Behavior: voting, participation, social factors
- Regime Types: democracies, autocracies, hybrid systems
- Case Studies: in-depth examination of specific countries
Discussion Exercise 1
Think of a political outcome that varies across two countries you know well.
- What differs between them?
- What might explain the difference?
- Is it institutions, culture, history, or something else?
Discuss with your neighbor for 5 minutes.
So What?
Comparative politics gives us tools to explain political variation.
But how do we move from observation to explanation? We need the scientific method.
Three Puzzles From This Course
Puzzle 1: Why Democracy Here but Not There?
South Korea and Singapore circa 1985:
- Similar GDP, high literacy, export-led growth
By 1995:
- South Korea: democracy
- Singapore: still autocratic
If wealth causes democracy, why did they diverge?
Puzzle 2: Why Violence Here but Not There?
Yugoslavia in 1991:
- Neighbors who intermarried for decades killed each other along ethnic lines within months
Tanzania since independence:
- 120+ ethnic groups, minimal ethnic mobilization
If diversity causes conflict, why is Tanzania peaceful?
Puzzle 3: Can Democracy Destroy Itself?
Hungary, 2010–present:
- Orbán won a free election with a 2/3 supermajority
- Then: new constitution, courts packed, media captured
- V-Dem democracy score: 0.82 → 0.28
If voters choose leaders who dismantle constraints, is that a failure of democracy – or democracy working as designed?
What These Puzzles Share
Each puzzle has the same structure:
- Two cases that look similar on key dimensions
- Yet they produce opposite outcomes
- Simple explanations (wealth, diversity, elections) fail
Comparative politics gives us the tools to explain why.
But first: how do we move from observation to explanation? We need science.
Science
What Is Science?
- A way of asking questions about the world
- Relies on systematic methods, not intuition or authority
- Always provisional: claims must be open to revision
- What makes this possible: our theories might be wrong
Falsifiability
What distinguishes science from non-science:
- Scientific claims are testable and falsifiable
- A statement must generate observable implications
- There must be some evidence that could show the claim is wrong
- This does not mean the claim is false – only that it is open to being proven false
Non-Falsifiable Statements
Two types of non-falsifiable statements:
1. Tautologies – true by definition
- “Democracies hold elections” – if democracy is defined by elections
- “Authoritarian regimes restrict freedoms” – circular if that is the definition
2. Unobservable phenomena
- “God created the world” – cannot be tested empirically
- Not necessarily wrong, but not falsifiable
Discussion Exercise 2
Which of the following are falsifiable?
- “Economic development causes democracy.”
- “All political systems are equally valid.”
- “Ethnic diversity increases the risk of civil war.”
For each, explain why or why not. What evidence would you need?
Discuss for 5 minutes.
So What?
Science gives us the standard for evaluating claims.
But how do we actually do science? We need a method.
The Scientific Method
The Scientific Method
Each step builds on the previous one. We corroborate rather than prove our theories.
Step 1: Formulate a Question
The best questions are puzzles:
X and Y are similar. Phenomenon A happened in X, but not in Y. Why?
- Good questions contradict a prior expectation
- Without a pre-existing theory, there are no surprises
Step 2: Build a Theory
A theory is a set of logically consistent statements that explain observations.
- Identifies causes and outlines a causal process
- Can be expressed as models – simplified maps of reality
- Ask: what process could have produced this outcome?
Step 3: Derive Hypotheses
Deduce implications from the theory:
- If our theory is correct, what else would we observe?
- Good theories generate many testable implications
- Hypotheses must be specific and falsifiable
Step 4: Test Hypotheses
Examine whether implications match empirical reality:
- Tests allow us to distinguish competing explanations
- We corroborate rather than prove theories
- A single test rarely settles a debate – replication matters
So What?
The scientific method gives us a roadmap from puzzle to evidence.
Let’s see how it works with a concrete example.
Scientific Method: An Example
The Puzzle
Female athletes often miss class for competitions.
Despite missing classes, they outperform the average student. Why?
A first attempt: “Female athletes are smart.”
Problem: this is borderline tautology – no causal process.
Three Competing Theories
1. Work Ethic Argument
- High-performing athletics requires strong work ethic
- Work ethic transfers to academic studies
2. Excellence Argument
- Good athletes develop effective strategies and tactics
- These tactics transfer to academic performance
3. Gender Argument
- Sports can free women from effects of gender bias
- The sense of efficacy from sports boosts academic outcomes
Evaluating the Theories
All three arguments have internal logic.
But science requires us to go further:
- Each generates different observable implications
- We can design tests to distinguish between them
- The best explanation survives empirical scrutiny
Discussion Exercise 3
For each of the three theories (work ethic, excellence, gender):
- What observable implication would you test?
- What evidence would falsify each theory?
- Which theory do you find most persuasive and why?
Discuss for 5 minutes.
So What?
This example shows how the scientific method works in practice.
Throughout this course, we will apply the same logic to political questions – from state formation to democratic erosion.
Elements of Logic
Basic Elements of Logic
- An argument: a set of logically connected statements
- Premises: true statements leading to a conclusion
- Conclusion: a claim deriving logically from premises
- An argument is valid when accepting premises compels the conclusion
- An argument is invalid when we can accept premises but reject the conclusion
Conclusion
What We Covered Today
- Comparative politics: studying political variation across countries using the comparative method
- Science and falsifiability: theories must be testable and open to being proven false
- The scientific method: question, theory, hypotheses, testing
- Logic: valid arguments connect premises to conclusions through a causal process
Next week: We begin with the first big question – how did states form, and why do some remain weak?
Popescu (JCU) Comparative Politics Lecture 1: Introduction to Comparative Politics