FACULTY OF ECONOMIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCESPOLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION


ADM 3102 - Comparative Political Analysis

Middle East Technical University

Faculty of Economics & Administrative Sciences

Department of Political Science & Public Administration

 

ADM.3102

Comparative Political Analysis

 

Instructor: Dr. Aylin Topal

taylin@metu.edu.tr

Office: FEAS A Building A27/B

Office Hours:

 

 

This course attempts to deal with the question of how to analyze state-society relations within a comparative perspective. It will specifically focus on the (ways in which different approaches study) dynamics of change and forms of representation in both developed and peripheral, capitalist social formations. There is a mid-term (30%) a final examination (30%), 5 reaction papers on selected weeks (25%) and participation (15%).

 

Organization of the Course and the Reading List

 

1. The State Debate of the Third World: Changing Paradigms or Changing Reality

 

From Modernization School to Institutionalist Analysis

 

Huntington, S. (1968). Political Order in Changing Societies, Yale UP, pp. 8-32.

Lerner, D. (1964). The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East, the Free Press, pp.vii-x; 43-76.

Leys, C. (1996) “S. Huntington and the End of Classical Modernization Theory”, in The Rise & Fall of Development Theory, Indiana University Press, pp.64-79.

Martinussen, J. (1997). Society, State & Market: A Guide to Competing Theories of Development, Zed Books pp.165-181.

Remmer, K. (1997). “The Resurgence of Institutionalist Analysis” World Politics 50 (1): 34-61.

 

Post-Colonial State and/or Peripheral/Dependent State

 

Cardoso, F.H. & E. Faletto (1979). Dependency and Development in Latin America, University of California Press, pp. 1-7, 8-28, 176-216.

Frank, A.G. (1970). “Development of Underdevelopment” in Latin America: Underdevelopment or Revolution, MR Press, pp.3-17.

Kay, C. (1989) Latin American Theories of Development and Underdevelopment, Routledge, pp.TBA

Leys, C. (1996). The Rise & Fall of Development Theory, Indiana UP, pp.45-63.

Gülalp, H. (1998). “The Eurocentrism of Dependency Theory and the Question of Authenticity”, Third World Quarterly 19(5): 951-961.

 

Developmental vs. Predatory State

 

Castels, M. (2000) The Rise of the Network Society, Blackwell, p. 198.

Cammack, P. (2007) “Class Politics Competitiveness and the Developmental State” Papers in the Politics of Global Competitiveness, No. 4.available online: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1526530

Chibber,V. (2003) Locked in Place, Princeton, pp. 13-47.

Clarkson, S. (1979) “The Political Economy of State Capitalism”, in The Soviet Theory of Development: India and the Third World in Marxist-Leninist Scholarship, Macmillan, pp.33-50.

Evans, P. (1999) “Transferable Lessons? Re-examining the Institutional Prerequisites of East Asian Economic Policies”, in Y. Akyüz (ed.) East Asian Development: New Perspectives, Frank Cass, pp. 66-83.

Grindle, M. (1991) “The New Political Economy: Positive Economics and Negative Politics”, in G. Meier (ed.) Politics and Policy Making in Developing Countries, ICS Press, pp. 41-67.

Halpern, S. (1997) In the Mirror of the Third World Cornell UP, pp.1-25.

Leftwich, A. (1995) “Bringing Politics Back in: Towards a Model of Developmental State”, Journal of Development Studies, 31(3): 400-421.

Song, H. (2010). “The Developmental State and the Neoliberal Transition in South Korea” in Economic Transitions to Neoliberalism in Middle-Income Countries: Policy Dilemmas, Economic Crises, Forms of Resistance, A. Saad-Filho and G.L. Yalman (eds.) Routledge, pp.141-154.

 

Rentier State

 

Beblawi, H. ve G. Luciani (1987). “Introduction”, in The Rentier State. H. Beblawi. and G. Luciani. (eds.) Kent, New York: Instituto Affari Internazionali, pp.1-22

Bromley, S. (1994). Rethinking Middle East Politics, Polity Press, pp. 6-45.

Keddie, N. (1982) “Comments on Skocpol” Theory and Society 11 (3): 285-292.

Mahdavy, H. (1970). “The Patterns and Problems of Economic Development in Rentier States: The Case of Iran” in Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East from the Rise of Islam to the Present Day. M.A. Cook (ed.), London: Oxford University Press. pp. 428-468

Shambayati, H. (1994). “The Rentier State, Interest Groups, and the Paradox of Autonomy: State and. Business in Turkey and Iran” Comparative Politics 26 (3): 307-331

Skocpol, T. (1982). “Rentier State and Shi’a Islam in the Iranian Revolution” Theory and Society 11 (3): 265-283.

 

Overall Discussion of Part 1

Midterm Exam

 

 

II. Types of States, Forms of State and Political Regimes

 

Jessop, B. (2008) State Power, Polity, pp.101-139.

Leys, C. (1996) The Rise & Fall of Development Theory, Indiana UP, pp.164-187.

Poulantzas, N. (1973) Political Power and Social Classes, London: NLB, pp.142-156, pp. 229-252.

Poulantzas, N. (1975) Fascism and Dictatorship, London: NLB, pp.299-335.

Thomas, P. (2002) “Bringing Poulantzas Back In”, in Paradigm Lost: State Theory Reconsidered. S. Aronowitz & P. Bratsis (eds.), University of Minnesota Press, pp. 73-85.

Yalman, G. (1985) “Popülizm, Bürokratik-Otoriter Devlet ve Türkiye”, Onbirinci Tez, 1: 16-69.

 

Corporatism

 

Jessop, B. (1990) The State Theory: Putting the Capitalist State in its Place, Penn State University Press, pp.110-143 available online at google books.

O’Donnell, G. (1977) “Corporatism and the Question of the State” in Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America J. Malloy (ed.), University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 47-87.

Williamson, P. (1989) Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to Corporatist Theory, London: Sage, pp.203-224.

 

Populism

 

Cammack, P. (1997) “Democracy and Dictatorship in Latin America, 1930-1980”, in Democratization, D. Potter et al. (eds.), Cambridge: Polity, pp. 152-173.

Cammack, P. (2000) “The Resurgence of Populism in Latin America”, Bulletin of Latin American Research19 (2): 149-161.

Hall, S. (1980) “Popular Democratic vs. Authoritarian Populism: Two Ways of Taking Democracy Seriously’”, in Marxism and Democracy, A. Hunt (ed.), pp. 157-185.

Laclau, E. (1977) Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory, Verso, pp.143-198.

Laclau, E. 2004) “Populism: What’s in a Name?” in Populism as the Mirror of Democracy, F. Panizza (ed.), Verso, London.pp.1-12.

 

Question of Regime Change

 

Cammack, P. (1985) “The Political Economy of Contemporary Military Regimes in Latin America: From Bureaucratic Authoritarianism to Restructuring”, in Generals in Retreat: The Crisis of Military Rule in Latin America, P. O’Brien & P. Cammack (eds.), Manchester UP, pp. 1-36.

Collier D. (1979). “Overview of the Bureaucratic-Authoritarian Model” in The New Authoritarianism in Latin America, Collier (ed.), Princeton University Press, pp.19-32.

Potter, D. (1997): “Explaining Democratisation” in Democratisation. D. Potter et al. (eds), Polity, pp.1-37

 

State-Society Relations in the Neoliberal Era

 

Cammack, P. (2004) “‘Signs of the times’: Capitalism, Competitiveness, and the New Face of Empire in Latin America”, Socialist Register 2005.

Castorina, E. (2007) “‘Democratic’ Neoliberalism in Argentina”, Socialist Register 2008: 265-281.

Haggard, S. and R. Kaufman (1997) “The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions”,

Comparative Politics 29 (3): 263-283.

Jessop, B. (2002) “Trends in the State” in B. Jessop, The Future of Capitalist State, pp.193-204.

Oszlak, O. (1986) “Public Policies and Political Regimes in Latin America” International Social Science Journal,108: 219-235.

Robinson, W. (2003) “Towards a New Conceptualisation of Development”, in W. Robinson, Transnational Conflicts, Verso, pp. 28-62.

Topal A. (2010) “Transition to Neoliberalism and Decentralisation Policies in Mexico” in Economic Transitions to Neoliberalism in Middle-Income Countries: Policy Dilemmas, Economic Crises, Forms of Resistance, A. Saad-Filho and G.L. Yalman (eds.) Routledge, pp. 230-243.

Tsoukalas, C. (2002) “Relative Autonomy and Its Changing Forms”, in Paradigm Lost: State Theory Reconsidered, S. Aronowitz &  P. Bratsis(eds.), University of Minnesota Press, pp. 221-244.

 

Concluding Remarks