Transcript The Good Society - De Anza College

Comparative Politics

Textbooks
 Case studies; thematic; little comparison

Draper and Ramsay, The Good Society
 Comparative; cases archetypes of distinct patterns
 Empirical and normative
○ How states compare? (similarities, differences)
○ What constitutes the good society?
○ Why are some countries better at promoting human
development?
 Institutional
○ Different institutions (rules governing political,
economic, and social life) produce different outcomes
The Good Society

Capability approach
 Good society meets minimal conditions that permit people (if they
choose) to flourish

Political institutions
 distribution of power; exec/leg/jud; regime type

Economic systems
 state-market relations

Political conflict
 cleavages, group identities, parties

Regime -- cluster of institutions, policy, and politics
 Rich democracies
○ Social democratic (Sweden), conservative (U.S.), Christian democratic
(Germany)
○ Developing states
○ Developmental dictatorships (S. Korea); predatory (Nigeria); fragmented
democracies (Brazil); developmental democratic (Chile)
 Russia and China

Which set of institutional arrangements provide citizens with
most capability?
Good Societies

Wealth, level of economic development
(GDP/capita) insufficient
 Includes desirable/undesirable goods/services
 Does not account for many desirable goods
 Does not capture wealth/income and other
inequalities

The good society
 Meets physical needs (food, healthcare, housing, etc.)
 Insures physical safety (security, freedom from
violence)
 Promotes informed decisions (access to education)
 Protects civil and political rights (speech, religion, etc.,
due process and equal protection)
Capability approach

Importance of each individual’s capability
 Physical well-being, safety, informed decision-making, civil
and political rights (SPIR)




Goal of good society: possible for each individual to
have high capability
No particular set of institutions necessary
State’s responsibility to create conditions in which
individuals can choose high capability
Criticisms
 Idealistic  not impossible; some states do better than
others
 Human nature/self-interested  mixed bag, range of
behaviors; dramatic differences in performance; not
overarching obstacle; function of institutional arrangements
 Cultural relativism  cultures not homogenous; often
conflictual; cultures change, evolve; not impartial
Institutions

Draper and Ramsay argue institutional
arrangements shape a country’s ability to enhance
citizen capability
 Different institutional arrangements (ways of organizing
economic, social, and political life) yield different results

Institutions: formal (written laws) and informal
(cultural norms) rules that structure relationships
among individuals
 Constrain individual behavior; exert power
 Create regularity, predictability
 Provide structure and meaning; “the grammar of our lives”
 Make social life possible
 Shape expectations, preferences, and behavior
Institutions and Politics


Institutions organize politics, struggle for power in
groups, organizations, and state
Groups struggle for influence over institutions
because they:
 Exert substantial power over us
 Tend to be enduring, self-reinforcing
○ people adjust expectations, behavior, and interests around
them; develop stake in maintenance; raises cost of changing
them
 Not neutral
○ benefit some groups more than others
○ shape and reflect distribution of power
○ those with power design institutions to preserve and enhance
advantage
 Shape nature of political conflict
Institutional Approach

Potential problem – Institutions appear as
iron cages, negating power of choice
 Trouble accounting for political change

Institutions are not hard and fixed; they
shift and change
 Political coalitions that bring them into existence
and support them change
 Respond to new imperatives and accommodate
powerful new actors

Culture and ideology influence political
behavior
Culture, ideology, and institutions

Culture and ideology influence political
behavior
 People subject to power of institutions and ideas
 Ideas and values guide how people respond to




institutional openings
Institutions exert variety of influences, which may
conflict
Values people hold, meanings they give to facts,
come between hard logic of institutions and how
people construct their interests and act on them
Institutions shape actions and are shaped by them
Power of ideas especially important during periods
of crisis and uncertainty
Discussion questions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
How do we make sense of human nature when countries differ in terms
of human capabilities; i.e., some countries are better than others at
promoting human development?
Is GDP per capita an inadequate standard for judging “the good society”?
If you had to choose one of the four criteria from the capability approach
as the most important, which would it be and why?
Rights are the only necessary component of the good society because
they can be used to obtain the other three. Do you agree?
What are the ways institutions can change? What are the factors that
make them more or less resistant to change?
What are the major benefits and drawbacks of institutions?
How does the capability approach relate to the institutional approach? In
particular, how can institutions shape a country’s ability to achieve the
good society?