Introduction

Comparative politics has a long and very distinguished history dating back to the very origin of
systematic political studies in ancient Greece and Rome. Even the most ancient people, compared
their situations with those of other people’s with whom they came in contact. The Bible is perhaps
one of the first written statements of comparative politics. The ancient Greeks carried out the
earliest systematic comparisons of a more modern and secular. Plato and Aristotle, the two
foremost ancient Greek political scientists, wrote two books ‘Republic’ (Plato) and
‘Politics’(Aristotle) and these are considered as the great books of all the time. In fact, Aristotle,
the father of political science, used comparative method for comprehending and analysing
principles, issues and problems of his times. He used comparative politics knowledge for building
up his theory. Aristotle collected approximately 150 constitutions and used the knowledge for
answering many questions of political dimensions. His admirers followed his path, and the
tradition continues. Several political thinkers like Cicero, Polybius, Machiavelli, Montesquieu, J.S
mill and others used comparative method in a highly productive way. In the 19th century
comparative politics studies were popularly designated as ‘comparative government’ studies.
Comparative government studies were used by political scientists for arriving at correct and valid
conclusions regarding the nature and organization of state and government. Their basic objective
was to find out the historical and legal similarities and dissimilarities among the various
governments and their political institutions. A comparative- normative-prescriptive study of
constitutions was conducted. It was an attempt to identify the best political institutions. The
dissatisfaction with the traditional approach and scope of comparative government, due to lack of
comprehensives in scope, unrealistic nature and unscientific methodology, led to the development
of a new science of comparative politics. In the 20th century, the study underwent revolutionary
changes. The traditional focus (comparative government) got replaced. A large number of political
scientists like Munro, C.F. Strong, Herman Finer, Almond, Powel, Coleman, and others worked
hard to replace the traditional norms and methods with modern, scientific methods. In many
western countries, comparative politics came to be regarded and developed as an autonomous
discipline. In third world countries too, so many scholars got engaged in comparative politics
studies and this exercise still continues.
NATURE AND SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE
POLITICS
Nature and scope of comparative politics is understandable only when one understands at least,
the main characteristics and meaning of’ ‘comparative government’. Although the two terms
‘Comparative Politics’ and ‘Comparative Governments’ are used loosely and interchangeably,
there is distinction between them. Traditionally, the comparative study of politics stands entitled
as ‘comparative government’. Comparative government includes the study of features and legal
powers of political institutions existing in various states. It is the study of state and other political
institutions in terms of their legal powers, functions, and positions on a comparative basis. The
summary of the main characteristics of comparative government have been:

• Emphasis upon the study of political institutions of various countries.

• Focus on the study of major constitutions of the world.
• Emphasis upon the study of powers and functions of various political institutions working
in different countries.
• Formal study of the organization and powers, description of the features of the constitutions
and political institutions, and legal powers of political institutions form the basic contents
of comparative government study.
• To build a theory of ideal political institutions has been the objective.
With all these features, comparative governments remained a very popular area of study upto the
first quarter of the 20th century. Thereafter, a large number of political scientists greatly
dissatisfied with its narrow scope, unscientific methodology, formal legalistic-institutional and
normative approach. They came forward to adopt comprehensiveness, realism, precision and
scientific study of the processes of politics as their new goal. Their efforts came to be designated
as comparative politics.
MEANING & DEFINITION OF COMPARATIVE
POLITICS
The study of comparative politics involves conscious comparisons in studying; political
experiences, institutions, behaviour and processes of major systems of government. It includes the
study of even extra constitutional agencies along with the study of formal governmental organs. It
is concerned with significant regularities, similarities and differences in the working of political
behavior. Accordingly, comparative Politics can be described as the subject that seeks to compare
the political systems in various parts of the Politics globe, with a view to understand and describe
the nature of politics and to build up a scientific theory of politics. Some popular definitions of
comparative politics are:
John Blondel: Comparative politics is “the study of patterns of national governments in the
contemporary world”
According to M.G. Smith,” Comparative Politics is the study of the forms of political
organizations, their properties, correlations, variations and modes of change”
According to E.A Freeman, “Comparative Politics is comparative analysis of the various forms
of govt. and diverse political institutions”.
On the basis of all these definitions, we can say that comparative politics involves a comparative
study of not only the institutional and mechanistic arrangements but also an empirical and
scientific analysis of non-institutionalized and non-political determinants of political behaviour.
Empirical study of political processes, structures and functions forms a major part of comparative
political studies.
NATURE OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Comparative Politics seeks to Analyse and compare the political systems operating in various
societies. In doing so, it takes into account all the three connotations of politics political activity,
political process and political power. Political activity consists of all the activities involved in
conflict resolution or in the struggle for power. Since the basic means of conflict-resolution is the
authoritative allocation of values, it involves an analysis of the process by which the authoritative
values are made and implemented in all societies. In this sense, politics stands for political process.
It involves the study of all formal as well as non-formal structures through which the political
process gets operationalized. The political process receives information and signals from the
environment and then transforms these information's and signals into authoritative values. Finally,
politics, being a struggle for power or a process of conflict resolution through the use of legitimate
power, involves a study of power or power relations in society. Laswell describes politics as the
process of shaping and sharing of power, Robert Dahl holds that politics involves power rule and
authority to a significant extent. Hence the study of politics naturally involves the study of power.
As such comparative politics involves the study and comparison of political activity, political
process and struggle for power in various political systems. It seeks to Analyse and compare
political systems in a holistic way as well as through a comparative analysis of their structures,
functions, infra-structures and processes. Comparative Politics nowadays characterized by a
number of features. Some important features are:
1. Analytical and empirical research
2. Objective study of politics- A value free empirical study-It rejects normative descriptive
methods of comparative government.
3. Study of the infra-structure of politics-Comparative Politics, now analyses the actual behavior
of individuals; groups structures, sub-systems and systems in relation to environment. It studies
the actual behavior of all institutions.
4. Inter-disciplinary focus: Comparative Politics focusses interdisciplinary approach. It studies
politics with the help of other social science like psychology, sociology, anthropology and
economics.
5. It studies political processes in both developed and developing countries. The biased and
parochial nature of traditional studies stands replaced and the study of political systems of Asia,
Africa, and Latin America enjoys equal importance with the study of African and European
political systems.
6. Theory building as the objective: The objective of Comparative politics study is scientific
theory building.
7. Adoption of ‘Political Systems’ Comparative politics has adopted the concept of ‘system’ for
the study of politics. It enables political scientists to study politics comprehensively, realistically
and empirically.
With all these features, Comparative politics is almost a new science of politics. It has rejected the
non-comprehensive scope, formal character, legal and institutionalized framework, normative
approach and parochial nature of the traditional comparative government studies.

SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS

Traditionally, the scope of Comparative Politics was limited and parochial. It was confused to the
study of constitutions and political institutions and political institutions in respect of their features,
powers and positions. It was ‘parochial’ in the sense that it is involved a study of only European
constitutions. Amongst the European Constitutions, the British constitution was regarded as the
mother constitution and standard constitution for measuring the worth of all other constitutions.
The emphasis was upon the study of governments and institutions.
In contemporary times, comparative politics has come out of the parochialism and limited scope
of comparative government. It has come to acquire a wide scope which includes the analysis and
comparison of the political processes, political activities, political functions, and political
structures of all political systems, developed as well as developing and European as well as Asian,
African and Latin American. After second world war, it has undergone revolutionary changes in
respect of its scope and methodology.
Modern political scientists realized the shortcomings of traditional studies and decided to eliminate
formalistic, legal institutionalism and extreme normativism of the traditionalists. They accepted
that it must include all the process of politics and not only legal institutions. The actual functioning
of all formal as well as informal political structures like interest groups, pressure groups, political
parties and political elites should also form the part of the scope of comparative politics. They
came forward to develop new tools, concepts, models and theories of political processes for
analyzing and comparing the behavior of all the political systems. They borrowed several new
concepts from other social sciences, and even some from natural sciences, for analyzing,
explaining and comparing all political phenomena. Consequently, there appeared a revolutionary
change in the scope and nature of comparative politics studies. Today, comparative politics has
secured a very wide scope. In fact, it includes all that comes within the purview of politics--the
study of all political processes, political activities, political relations and power relations found in
every part of the world. A comparative study of the regularities, similarities and differences among
the structures and functions of all political systems forms the core of its scope.

The following are the main subjects included in the scope of comparative politics
All political structures
The scope of comparative politics includes of all structures, formal and informal, governmental
and extra governmental. These structures are directly or indirectly involved in the struggle for
power. It is not confined to the study of three forms governmental organs—legislature, executive
and judiciary. Along with these, bureaucracy, interest groups, pressure groups, elites, political
parties and all other political groups of human being forms a part of the scope of comparative
politics.

Functional studies
Comparative politics seeks to study more from the functions which constitute the political process
and their actual operations in the environment. It studies the functions of interest articulation,
interest aggregation, political communication, rulemaking, rule application, rule adjudication,
socialization, decision making, policy making and the like.

Study of political behaviour

Another important part of the scope of comparative politics is study of the process of politics.
Voting behavior, political participation, leadership, recruitment, elite behavior, mass politics etc.
form an integral part of comparative politics.

Study of similarities and differences

Comparative politics also undertake similarities and dissimilarities between various political
processes and functions. However, the approach is not descriptive and formalistic. It is on the basis
of actual functioning of political structures and processes, the similarities and dissimilarities are
explained and compared. The objective is not to decide which is the best process or system. The
objective is systematic explanation, understanding and theory building.

Study of political systems

Comparative politics seeks to analyze the actual behavior and performance of political systems-
western as well as non- western. The political systems are analyzed and compared in terms of the
structures, functions, capabilities and performances.
Study of environment
the study of comparative politics demands a study of the psychological, sociological, economic
and anthropological environment. For this study, the political scientists have developed concepts
like political culture, political socialization, political modernization etc. The study of the political
culture of various political systems forms a very popular focus in comparative politics. This
concept has definitely enhanced the ability of political science to explain and compare the
functioning of various political systems. Thus, the scope of comparative politics has become very
broad. It includes facts within the purview of political processes and activities. It seeks to study all
mechanisms of politics. Gabriel A Almond has summarized the new innovations in the discipline
of comparative politics and G.Binham Powele has under:
Search for more comprehensive scope
Search for precision
Search for realism
Search for new intellectual order
These four directions have greatly revolutionalised the contemporary comparative politics.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TRADITIONAL AND MODERN

COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Traditionally, the study of comparative politics is entitled as ‘comparative government’. It
includes the study of political institutions existing in various states. The features, merits,
demerits, similarities and dissimilarities of political institutions were compared. It was an attempt
to identify the best of political institutions. This focus, (Traditional view), continued to remain
popular up to the end of the 19th century. In the 20th century the study underwent revolutionary
changes. The traditional focus of the study of politics got replaced by new scope, methodology,
concepts, techniques-popularly known as modern view of the study of politics. Attempts were
made by many political scientists to develop a new science of ‘comparative politics. They
adopted comprehensiveness, realism, precision and use of scientific methods as the new goals for
the study of comparative politics. This new attempt is nowadays popularized as ‘modern’
comparative politics.
Even though the terms ‘comparative government’ and ‘comparative politics are often used
loosely and interchangeably, yet there exists a number of distinctions between them. Major
distinctions between the traditional and modern view of the comparative study of politics are the
following:

Difference in scope:
A major area of distinction is with the scope of the two views. In traditional view, the scope of
the study is limited. It emphasized mainly on the comparative study of formal political
institutions. The legal power and functions of the institutions were examined in it. In the modern
view, the scope of comparative politics is much wider. It includes the analysis and comparison of
the actual behavior of political structures, formal as well as informal. Scholars believe that these
political structures, governmental or non-governmental, directly or indirectly affect the process
of politics in all political systems.
Difference in approach:
Both traditional and modern comparative politics follow different approaches to its study.
Traditionalists follow narrow and normative approach. It involves descriptive studies with a
legal– institutional framework and normative– prescriptive focus. As against it, modernists stand
for empirical, analytical studies with a process orientated or behavioural focus and they follow
always scientific methodology. It seeks to analyse and compare empirically the actual behaviour
of political structures.
Traditional view is much older than modern view of the study of comparative politics:
Study of political environment is different:
In traditional view it fails to give due place to the study of the environment of political
institutions. But in modern view, it gives due importance to study of environments and infra
structures of politics.
Focus of two views are different:
Traditionalists ignore the importance of inter disciplinary focus, but modernists fully accept the
importance of it and strongly advocates the use of such focus.
Goals are different:
The objective of the traditional view of the comparative study of politics has been always the
description of the ideal of political institutions in different states of the world. The goal of
modernists has been always to predict the real structure of political institutions, in a most
scientific way.
Traditional view is parochial, while modern view is global:
Traditionalism is parochial oriented specially towards European political systems. Modern
scientific view of the study of comparative politics is global and it includes the study of all
political systems of the world– European and non European, Western and Eastern and developed
as well as developing.

Theory building is also different:

Traditionalist seeks to build of a theory of ideal political institutions. But modernists seek to
build up a scientific theory of politics Though, the study of comparative politics is very old, yet
it’s has increased its importance only in recent times. In contemporary period all the political
scientists accept that for a proper understanding of all political systems, a comparative study of
their structures and functions in a most scientific way is essential.

Relevance of study of comparative politics

Academic Relevance
1. Understanding Political Diversity: Comparative politics helps analyze different political
systems, institutions, and processes, promoting cross-national understanding. This includes
examining various forms of government, electoral systems, and political cultures.
2. Theory Building: Developing theories and frameworks to understand and predict political
phenomena, advancing political science knowledge. Comparative politics contributes to
theoretical debates on democratization, authoritarianism, and political economy.
3. Interdisciplinary Approaches: Integrating insights from sociology, economics, history, and
anthropology, fostering a comprehensive understanding. This includes examining the social,
economic, and cultural contexts of political phenomena.

Practical Relevance
1. Informing Public Policy: Comparative politics provides evidence-based insights for
policymakers, enhancing decision-making. This includes analyzing policy interventions,
evaluating program effectiveness, and identifying best practices.
2. Promoting Democracy and Human Rights: Understanding democratic transitions,
consolidation, and challenges, supporting democratic development. Comparative politics informs
strategies for promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.
3. Global Governance: Analyzing international organizations, cooperation, and conflict
resolution, improving global cooperation. This includes examining the role of institutions like the
UN, EU, and WTO.
4. Development and Governance: Improving governance, reducing poverty, and promoting
economic development. Comparative politics informs development strategies, institutional
reform, and capacity building.

Professional Relevance
 1. Career Opportunities: Comparative politics prepares students for careers in government,
international organizations, NGOs, and research. This includes roles in policy analysis,
diplomacy, and development.
2. Diplomacy and International Relations: Understanding different political systems and
cultures, enhancing diplomatic effectiveness. Comparative politics informs diplomatic strategies,
negotiation techniques, and conflict resolution.
3. Journalism and Media: Analyzing and reporting on global political events. Comparative
politics provides journalists with context, insights, and expertise.
4. Research and Academia: Contributing to the field of political science. Comparative politics
advances knowledge, informs theory, and shapes research agendas.

Social Relevance
1. Promoting Global Understanding: Comparative politics fosters empathy and understanding
among nations. This includes examining cultural, historical, and social contexts.
2. Addressing Global Challenges: Understanding responses to climate change, migration, and
economic inequality. Comparative politics informs global governance, policy coordination, and
collective action.
3. Encouraging Civic Engagement: Informing citizens about political processes and institutions.
Comparative politics promotes critical thinking, civic participation, and democratic values.
4. Supporting Democratic Values: Promoting democratic principles, human rights, and the rule
of law. Comparative politics informs strategies for democratic consolidation, human rights
protection, and justice.

Methodological Relevance
1. Quantitative and Qualitative Methods: Developing research skills and analytical frameworks.
Comparative politics employs statistical analysis, case studies, and comparative case analysis.

2. Case Studies and Comparative Analysis: Examining specific cases and broader patterns.
Comparative politics uses case studies to illustrate theoretical concepts and test hypotheses.
3. Statistical Analysis and Data Interpretation: Applying statistical techniques to political data.
Comparative politics employs regression analysis, econometrics, and data visualization.

Contemporary Relevance
1. Understanding Populist Movements and Nationalism: Analyzing the rise of populist
movements. Comparative politics examines the causes, consequences, and implications.
2. Impact of Globalization and Technological Advancements: Examining the effects on politics.
Comparative politics analyzes globalization's impact on governance, inequality, and political
participation.
3. Addressing Democratic Backsliding and Authoritarianism: Understanding democratic
erosion. Comparative politics informs strategies for democratic consolidation, institutional
reform, and human rights protection.
4. Role of Social Media in Politics: Exploring social media's influence. Comparative politics
examines social media's impact on political participation, mobilization, and discourse.

Examples and Case study

Case Study: Comparative Analysis of Democratic Transitions in South Africa and Indonesia

Background:
 South Africa and Indonesia, two countries with diverse cultural, economic, and political contexts,
underwent significant democratic transitions in the late 20th century. South Africa transitioned
from apartheid to democracy in 1994, while Indonesia transitioned from authoritarian rule to
democracy in 1998.

Research Questions:
1. What factors contributed to the success of democratic transitions in South Africa and Indonesia?
2. How did institutional design and civil society influence democratic consolidation?
3. What lessons can be drawn from these cases for promoting democracy in other countries?

Methodology:
1. Comparative case analysis
2. Qualitative and quantitative data collection (interviews, surveys, archival research)
3. Process tracing and causal analysis

Findings:
Similarities:
1. Both countries experienced significant social and economic changes preceding democratic
transitions.
2. Strong civil society movements played crucial roles in pushing for democratic reforms.
3. International pressure and support contributed to democratic transitions.

Differences:
1. Institutional design: South Africa adopted a proportional representation system, while
Indonesia adopted a presidential system.
2. Economic context: South Africa's economy was more developed, while Indonesia's economy
was more vulnerable to crisis.
3. Role of the military: South Africa's military was relatively neutral, while Indonesia's military
played a significant role in politics.
Lessons Learned:
1. Strong civil society and international support are crucial for democratic transitions.
2. Institutional design matters: proportional representation can promote inclusivity, while
presidential systems can concentrate power.
3. Economic stability and security are essential for democratic consolidation.

Implications:
1. Policy recommendations for promoting democracy in other countries.
2. Insights for international organizations and donors supporting democratic development.
3. Contributions to theoretical debates on democratization and democratic consolidation.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the study of comparative politics offers invaluable insights into the complexities of
political systems, institutions, and processes across diverse contexts. By analyzing and comparing
different political experiences, scholars and practitioners can:
- Develop nuanced understandings of governance, democracy, and political dynamics
- Inform evidence-based policy decisions and development strategies
- Promote global cooperation, democracy, and human rights
- Address pressing global challenges, such as inequality, conflict, and climate change

The relevance of comparative politics extends beyond academia, influencing:

- Diplomacy and international relations
- Journalism and media
- Research and academia
- Policy-making and governance

As the world continues to evolve, the importance of comparative politics will only grow. By
embracing comparative analysis, we can:
- Foster global understanding and cooperation
- Enhance democratic governance and human rights
- Promote sustainable development and peace

In an increasingly interconnected world, the study of comparative politics is essential for

navigating complex political landscapes and building a more just, equitable, and peaceful future.
The study of comparative politics is crucial in today's interconnected world, offering invaluable
insights into diverse political systems, institutions, and processes. By analyzing and comparing
political experiences globally, scholars and practitioners develop nuanced understandings of
governance, democracy, and political dynamics. This informs evidence-based policy decisions,
promotes global cooperation, democracy, and human rights, and addresses pressing challenges
such as inequality, conflict, and climate change. Comparative politics fosters global understanding,
enhances democratic governance, and promotes sustainable development and peace. Its relevance
extends beyond academia, influencing diplomacy, journalism, research, and policy-making. To
navigate complex political landscapes effectively, comparative politics must be integrated into
academic curricula, research initiatives, and policy-making processes. Ultimately, the study of
comparative politics empowers us to build a more just, equitable, and peaceful world, where
diverse political systems coexist harmoniously. By embracing comparative politics, we can bridge
cultural divides, promote global citizenship, and address the complexities of an increasingly
interconnected world, thereby shaping a brighter future for all nations and peoples.
Reference

• UG_polIII.pdf
• pol4.pdf
• SCHOOL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION
• Ch_01.indd