The comparison will be done four major ways. First, we will look at the overall systems. This will include looking at the political environment, political structure and its functions. The second step we will take is to study the political culture. This process will take us into the process and policy levels to include how political socialization occurs in each country and what are the key agents for socialization in each respectively. Next, we will drive into the interest articulation and aggregation. This paper will accomplish this by giving a description of how this occurs in each country. The fourth step is simply to compare how public policy is crafted in these two countries. Once the four steps have been completed this paper will give …show more content…
It took five week of elections and the winner won thirty-one percent of the popular vote (Mahr & Miller, 2014, p. 22). In India, the interest groups focus on working conditions. The India 's unions align themselves closely to political parties so that during election time they can be more powerful. During the elections unions often organize illegal stoppages of work , also known as "wildcat strikes" (Powell, Dalton, & Strom, 2012, p. 593) to try to get state intervention for better conditions. There is, however, a problem; there are so many unions that compete for a limited amount of workers that the sheer amount of unions degrade the effectiveness. The same would be said for elections. 464 different political parties participated in the election (Mahr & Miller, 2014, p. 22). India is crippled because its gross national product when it would come to the terms of purchasing power parity is only about six percent that of the United States gross national product (Powell, Dalton, & Strom, 2012, p. 599). This is not to mention that India 's literacy rate is low as well; this is would be about sixty-five percent (Powell, Dalton, & Strom, 2012, p. 599). India has maintained a democratic form of government regardless of mass poverty and low literacy; a condition that is ripe for communism but continues to thrive against all
Elazar’s political culture typology divides state political culture into three dominant categories: moralist, individualist, and traditionalist. Moralists measure government by its commitment to the public good and concern for public welfare.
Donald Grinde is the author of The Iroquois and the Founding of the American Nation, one of the earliest books to argue for an Indian influence on the formation of the American democracy. Since Grinde’s publication and Bruce Johansen’s a year later, there has been a great deal of debate over this issue. Many of the most prominent opponents of the influence thesis have failed to distinguish between the arguments of more extreme authors, such as Gregory Schaaf, who claim that the Iroquois Gayanashagowa was copied by the U.S. Constitution, and those with a more moderate stance, like Johansen and Grinde, who simply point to a clear influence (Johansen, 1998). This paper intends to argue along the lines of these latter authors. Our founding fathers did not copy the Gayanashagowa or Great Law of Peace, but our Constitution was written with reflection upon the Iroquoian government with the goal of synthesizing this model into a form that could satisfy the needs of the American people. Given the evidence presented by Grinde and Johansen, it is clear that Native Americans influenced early U. S. political minds—if not directly, then at least indirectly.
These two ideologies provide some important building blocks for an ideal political ideology. Aspects from philosophies could be taken to create an innovative and new model that could govern the world. Presently however, there isn’t a political ideology that the world should aspire to. Factors within each state also make it difficult to conform to one as this can cause conflict. “There is no perfect ideology” (Burt, 2014) rather systems and beliefs that have evolved throughout time to their present day shape.
Hague, R. & Harrop, M. 2013. An Introduction: Comparative Government and Politics, 9thedn. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. 58-75.Available:
Elazar, Daniel. "Explaining Policy Differences Using Political Culture." Reading. West Texas A&M University. Political Culture Handout. Dr. Dave Rausch, Teel Bivins Professor of Political Science. Web. 23 Mar. 2011. < http://www.wtamu.edu/~jrausch/polcul.html.>
A policy is devised by politicians who have certain belifs on how a society must be governed. Politicians with similar belifs come toge...
In modern times, it is very hard to attain a governmental system where every citizen votes on every political matter. Populations are just too big for that. Instead, countries have their own way in which they believe is the best option in governing their p...
Within parliamentary systems, the government i.e. the legislature consist of the political party with the most popularly elected Members of Parliament (MPs) in the main legislative parliament e.g. the House of Commons in the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister is appointed by the party to lead as the executive decision-maker, and the legislature work to support and carry out their will (Fish, 2006). In presidential systems, the President is directly elected with the support of their political party, with the legislative being separately elected and, in the case of the United States, being made up of representatives from different states (BIIP, 2004). This essay will provide examples to suggest that Presidents are generally more powerful than Prime Ministers. As two of the oldest forms of parliamentary and presidential governments (Mainwaring and Shugart, 1997), the United Kingdom and the United States will be the main focus of this essay, but other parliamentary and presidential countries will be mentioned.
These two political ideologies offer to government leaders, policy makers, and thoughtful citizens a set of guides permitting some semblance of coherent conclusions regarding compelling social, economic and political issues. Their common features include rejection of radicalism and its attending violent uprooting of established instructions and practices, acceptance of the need for restraints on the powers of government, advocacy of balance in society regarding individual rights and social powers, and ultimately some root concerns for individual dignity. Most certainly disagreement abounds between the two woe within the same government framework. This agreement to disagree in a civil manner surely constitutes one of mankind’s most noble achievements.
In On Democracy, Robert Dahl presents five criteria that states are required to meet in order to satisfy the primary aim of democracy, which is to provide political equality to all of its citizens (1998, 37). The criteria include effective participation, equal voting, enlightened understanding, open agenda setting and inclusion. (Dahl, 1998, 38). Above these criteria, this paper will only focus on effective participation and enlightened understanding to apply them to India; this is because its citizens are going through a tough time with the two criteria to become a state with effective democracy. Therefore, this paper will demonstrate that India is in the process of achieving effective participation, but significantly lacks enlightened understanding.
The art of comparing is a procedure through which key political similarities and differences can be grouped together to enrich understanding. The art of comparing sets out a mixture of key areas to be compared given their distinct contexts for example countries, groups, institutions the list of comparison is endless in the world of politics. Heywood (2004 p.11) gives a standard definition of comparative politics as “Grouping of strategies and techniques used to advance understanding within a field”. In my essay, I will begin with arguing the strengths for the art of comparing and how it continues to be a useful tool using the example of countries, political setups, historical examples to back up the strengths of the comparative method. I will continue on by looking at some of the weaknesses when it comes to comparative politics, which make it not such an essential tool for political scientists. Finally, I will outline the relevant techniques used to make the art of comparing not only useful for comparativists, but a necessary part of a political scientists tool kit.
This essay is aimed to examine one of the agents of political socialisation for the way in which it operates and the effects it may have in Nigeria. Political socialisation is learning process that begins very early and continues all throughout ones life. Through political socialisation people acquire their perceptions and feelings about their political environment. It accounts for both the commonalties and diversities of political life. (DP Dawson p1).
A political institution is a system of politics and government. It is usually compared to the law system, economic system, cultural system, and other social systems. It is different from them, and can be generally defined on a spectrum from left, i.e. communism and socialism to the right, i.e. fascism. Linz’s argument is on the description of Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes, which brings the main and important argument of explaining both Presidential and Parliamentary systems. Another important author whose thoughts were referred to political institutions is Seymour Martin Lipset. His argument emphasizes on political cultural-cultural factors rather than political systems. The last individual whose main arguments refer to politics and political institutions is Donald Horowitz. He describes that Linz claims are not sustainable because it is regionally skewed and highly selective sample.
The Importance of Religion in Indian Politics India is the largest democratic country in the world, in the last fifty years it has travelled and been influenced by multiple social and economic changes in the future. Its independence from Britain in 1947. partition creating Pakistan and the Pakistan/ Indian debate over Kashmir has been a fundamental political movement within the past few years. As Y.B.Damle states, “Politics is concerned with goal-attainment and politics is the art of possibility”, the political process cannot. function without the structural features.
Comparative politics is an important aspect of political science in that instead of studying how this country functions, it studies why other countries around the world are the way they are. There must be some medium for finding the differences and similarities between one county and another in order discover what can effect such aspects as economic strength, military strength, and the structure of the regime in power. One reason to compare countries is to help ourselves by allowing us to learn about other countries while escaping the ethnocentric fallacy many of us have. The Unites States may have a good government but is not necessarily a perfect government; certain countries may have aspects of their own government that we could learn from and perhaps improve upon our own system. Another reason to compare countries is to understand how countries evolve, discover patterns, and why they evolve in the way they do. Another very important reason to study comparative politics is to better understand how certain regimes work for purposes of international relations and foreign policy. In order to create policy regarding other countries and in order to give aid to these countries we must know how these countries function so that we can work with the countries instead of blindly trying to change them in a way that we seem fit. This is especially important in the modern age with the evolution of a global cooperation between many countries and the fact that the United States has become the watchdog, big brother, and teacher for many of the less developed countries of the world.