Interdisciplinary Seminar in European Studies

MCGILL UNIVERSITY Department of Political Science ____________________________________________________________ POLI 630 and Poli 659 Comparative European Politics Interdisciplinary Seminar in European Studies Fall Term 2010 Prof. Filippo Sabetti Office Leacock 518 Tel. 514 398 4812 Fax. 514 398 1770 Office Hrs: MW 4:30-5:15pm & by appointment e-mail: [email protected] General Course Description This seminar is devoted to the analysis of the domestic politics and political economy of European countries in a comparative, historical and global, perspective. The course combines an overview of developments across and beyond the region with specific assignments that encourage each student to develop a specialization in comparative politics and to add new concepts and frameworks to his/her intellectual toolkit. By taking as the point of departure markets and states, the core question is: what has made European politics unique and what has made it similar to that in other parts of the world? In the process of providing answers, we will examine specific empirical cases and theoretical issues: 1) the ways in which social scientists have come to understand continuities and discontinuities in European politics and the extent to which the growth of state and market mechanisms have favoured or hindered the exercise of self-governing capabilities among citizens; and 2) the importance of creativity and methods in the practice of research. The emphasize the latter, what better way than to focus on Tocqueville’s Democracy in America: Tocqueville sought answers for the democratic revolution taking place in Europe by looking to the United States. Required Readings (available in the Bookstore) Berman, Harold (1993). Law and Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Berman, Sheri (2006). The Primacy of Politics. Social Democracy and the making of Europe in the Twentieth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2 Crozier, Michel . the Bureucratic Phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Transaction Books edition, 1999. Hont, Istvan (2005). Jealousy of Trade. International Competition and the Nation-State in Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, paperback edition 2009. Polanyi, Karl (1944). The Great Transformation. The Political Origins of our Time. Boston: Beacon Press paper edition. Thelen, Kathleen (2004). How Institutions Evolve. The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States and Japan. New York: Cambridge University Press. Tilly, Charles (1990). Coercion, capital and European states. Ad 990-1990. London: Blackwell. Tocqueville, Alexis de. (1856). The Old Regime and the French Revolution. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books edition. Tocqueville, Alexis de. 2010. Democracy in America. Vols 1-4. Ed. by Eduardo Nolla. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Edition, 2010. Vibert, Frank (207). The Rise of the Unelected. Democracy and the New Separation of Powers. New York: Cambridge University Press. Requirements and Grading The set of readings is wide ranging, with multiple and complementary modes of analysis and explanations. You are challenged to engage some of the best minds that have struggled to understand, and often recast what we know about, comparative European politics, to see how they reached the conclusions they did and to derive your own conclusions about the practice of comparative research. Your final grade will be based on:  Four short reviews (20% )  Active class participation and assigned seminar presentation (20%).  Three short essays (60%). Weekly Reviews The four short reviews on the assigned readings of your choice that answers the following questions: 3 1). What major point is the author trying to make? Sum up the most important argument. 2). Does the author prove her/his argument convincingly? What methodology, logic of inquiry are used? The aim here is to show fidelity to what the author tried to do. 3). What important insight(s) or fact(s) have you gained from this reading, and that you did not know before? 4). Could you have constructed a better research design for the same argument? Do you detect cognitive biases and omissions? Can these be overcome? These reviews may be done in outline form, list each reading’s title with numbered answers to queries 1-4. The first review is due in class beginning Week 4. Because they are meant to encourage you to think about the readings before you come to class, you should submit them at the beginning of class and hopefully distribute to the others as well. Each review will be graded either “check,” “check minus” or “check plus.” Participation All students are expected to come to class fully prepared to discuss the readings for that week. You are expected to participate actively and regularly in class discussion and to lead the discussion of one particular weekly topic of your choice. Analytic Essays You will write three relatively short, analytic essays, really reflections, over the course of the semester to respond to some of the questions raised in the syllabus. You should structure each essay in such a way that it present an argument dealing with a particular research topic and use materials from the assigned readings to support your argument. Your paper should be no longer than 6-to-8 pages double spaced, not counting the bibliography, with reasonable margins and in 12 point font. No outside reading is required or expected in writing these papers. The first essay is due Oct. 6; the second, Nov. 10; the third, Dec. 4. Here are marking criteria that will be used to evaluate written work: 1.analytical rigour (logic, precision, clarity of argument, consideration of counterargument, etc. hence the importance of focusing precisely on essay topic). 2.originality/creativity 3.structure of each essay clear and logical 4.sentence mechanics, quality of prose, grammar, spelling (while not much is put on spelling errors, still you should try not to make such errors) 5.scholarship (accurate representation of authors cited, other works engaged with when appropriate) Integrity: McGill University values academic integrity. Therefore all students must understand the meaning and consequences of cheating, plagiarism, and other academic offenses under the Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures (see http://www.mcgill.ca/integrity for more information). 4 TOPICAL OUTLINE WITH READINGS Sept. 1: Introduction & Organization Sept. 8-15: Going to America to understand France: Democracy in America as method and as practice in understanding the democratic revolution Required reading: Tocqueville, vols. 1-4 (bilingual edition) Two weeks of intensive reading may be not do justice to Tocqueville’s method of inquiry and empirical analysis. Still for the time available, I suggest the following topics and questions: Sept. 8: Civilization and Democracy: Social and Political Conditions Readings:Vol. 1, chap. 2, 45-66,Vol. 1, chap. 3, 74-90, Vol. 1, chap. 4, 91-97, Vol. 1, chap. 5, 98-166 Questions: What are the key elements of the social and political conditions of the colonies of New England that allow them to maintain the delicate balance of liberty and equality required for civilization? What makes the social and political conditions of France so inimical to liberty but not to civilization? Civilization and Democracy: Religion, Morals, Education Readings:Vol. 1, Chap. 2, 67-73,Vol. 2, Chap. 9, 466-493,Vol. 3, Chap. 5, 742753, Vol. 4, Chap. 9, 1041-1067 Questions: How does religion (even one as problematic and strict as Puritanism) civilize individuals and societies according to Tocqueville? How does religion help to civilize politics and commerce according to Tocqueville? Does Tocqueville’s view of religion’s positive influence rely on problematic gender divisions of labor: e.g. 1) women as the protectors of religion vs. men as the innovators in politics and business or 2) the salutary bondage or sacrifices that the mature wife freely chooses in marriage vs. the freedom of thought she experiences as a young women growing up in America? Liberty and the Democratic Spirit Readings:Vol. 1, Author’s Introduction, 3-32, Vol. 1, Chaps. 2, 3, 45-147, Vol. 4, Chap. 5, 1007-1019, Vol. 4, pt 4, Chap. 1, 1191-1193 Vol. 4, Appendix 5, 1368-1372, Vol. 4, Appendix 6, Forward to Twelfth Edition, 1373-1375 5 Questions: What kinds of relations does democracy (understood as equality of social conditions) foster in the family, civil society and politics? How does democracy prepare men for liberty, and what role does the statesman have to play in also fostering/cultivating liberty? In Appendix 6, T claims not to be surprised by the events now taking place in France (1848) and he describes his quote (on page 1373, written 15 years earlier), as “lines made prophetic by events, [which] can again today call the attention of the public to his work without fear.” Was 9/11 an event which can and ought to do this to preserve liberty and the democratic spirit, and if so, why and how? Sept. 15 Centralization, Tyranny and Equality Readings:Vol. 1, Chap. 5, 142-166, Vol. 2, Chap. 6, 395-426 Vol. 4, pt 4, Chap.1, 1191-1261 Questions: By what route(s) can democracy lead to new forms of tyranny and despotism? What can the statesman do to forestall and/or correct these tendencies and maintain liberty? Does the rise of new technologies such as the internet, blogging, facebook speed up our march towards new forms of tyranny and despotism, or does it offer new resources for the statesman AND citizens to forestall and/or correct these tendencies and maintain liberty? What is the connection between the rise of new technologies and the new avenues of exploration that are opened up by this new edition of T’s D of Am (itself made possible in part by the editors and in part by new technologies of editing in the 21st century)? Individualism, Independence and Self-Interest Readings: vol. 3, pt. 2, Chaps. 1-11, 872-938, Vol. 4, pt. 3, Chap. 4, 1005-1006. Vol. 4, pt. 4, Chaps. 7-8, 1262-1285 Questions: How does one reconcile T’s insistence that democracy leads to an increasing independence and isolation amongst individuals, with his insistence that democracy strengthens the mores or sentiments of compassion and empathy, and that democracy in America involves a new notion of self-interest that encompasses others? How does commerce or commercial society play a role in this? How does T differ from Montesquieu and Smith on these questions, or does he? Maintaining Liberty Against Despotism/Tyranny: Associations, Newspapers et al Readings:Vol. 2, pt. 2, Chaps.1-4, 289-312,Vol. 2, pt. 2, Chap. 5, 364-365 Vol. 2, pt. 2, Chap. 6, 375-401 Vol. 2, pt. 2, Chaps. 8, 9, 10, 451-466, 488-513, 582-648. Questions: How do voluntary and intermediate associations preserve liberty in America? How does the American system of government preserve this? Are citizens of modern 6 democracies still bowling alone? How is the internet, blogging, cell-phone culture like and unlike the newspapers and voluntary associations that T praises so much? Can we understand T’s on-going conversation with himself and others in the marginalia, in his correspondences, etc as a way of ensuring imaginary and distant “voluntary associations” or conversations over time and across space? How are we performing this imaginary yet potentially transformative activity right now? Sept. 22: Law as a revolutionary cultural force Reading: Berman, Law and Revolution (you may find it profitable to start the reading by reading the introduction and conclusion first) Questions: How and why was law such a revolutionary cultural force in European development? What was the papal “revolution” about? And in what ways it encouraged the rise of the rule of law and secular legalism? What is law? Where did come from? And what system of law – rule of law and secular legalism - emerged? Was royal law destined to be the dominant system? Sept 29: State Building Required Readings: Hendrik Spruyt (1994). The Sovereign State and Its Competitors: An Analysis of Systems Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press esp. chs. 1 to 4 and 8 and 9 Charles Tilly (1999). Coercion, Capital and European States Ad 9001990. Suggested Readings: Acemoglu, D. and J. A.Robinson (2006). The Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boix, C. (2003). Democracy and Distribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Berins Collier, Ruth (1999). Paths toward Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Compare now B. Moore (1966). Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Boston: Beacon, 1993, to appreciate how far we have progressed since the 1960s. Daniel Ziblatt (2006). “How did Europe Democratize.” World Politics 58 (Jan.): 311-38. Questions: Compare and evaluate the explanations put forward by Tilly and Spruyt for the development of national states. How does Spruyt explain the development of the national state in Europe? Explain the chief causal mechanisms that Spryut invokes? 7 Oct. 6: Revolution and Change Required Reading: Tocqueville, The Old Regime and the French Revolution Suggested Readings: Kershaw and Lewin, Stalinism and Nazism. Dictatorship in Comparison, 1-25, and chaps. 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 12 Antoni Kamiski (1992). An Institutional Theory of Communist Regimes. San Francisco: ICS Press. David Roberts (2006). The Totalitarian Experiment in Twentieth-Century Europe. Understanding the Poverty of Great Politics. New York: Routledge, 1-270 M. Sproule-Jones et al. ed (2008). The Struggle to Constitute and Sustain Productive Orders. Vincent Ostrom’s Quest to Understand Human Affairs. Landham: Lexington Books. Chapter by F. Sabetti. Questions: Why violence and change often go together? Can they be decoupled? What is the paradox of revolution that emerges from Tocqueville? What are the mechanisms that lead and maintain this paradox across time and place? Can there be democratization with out violence? (Sabetti chapter in Mark Sproule-Jones) Oct. 13: In Care of the State: the Administrative State Reading: Crozier Suggested Reading: E. N. Suleiman (1974). Politics,Power and Bureaucracy in France. The Administrative Elite. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Questions: What’s original in Crozier’s analysis of the bureaucratic phenomenon? What are the mechanisms that keep it going? Can the paradox of bureaucracy be overcome? Oct. 20: Is there a politics of numbers? Statistics to the aid of (centralized) government and administration Readings: James Scott (1998). “Part I: State Projects of Legibility and Simplication.” Pp. 9-83. In his Seeing like a State. New Haven: Yale University Press. Jean-Guy Prevost (2009). “The Politics of Expertise: Statisticians and the State.” Pp. 103-38. In his A Total Science: Statistics in Liberal and Fascist Italy. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. W. Alonso (1987). “The Sociology of Official Statistics.” Pp. 7-57, in Paul Starr, eds., The Politics of Numbers. New York: Russell Sage Foundations. Ian Hacking (1990). “The Argument.” Pp. 1-10. In his The Taming of Chance . New York: Cambridge University Press. Anat E. Leibler “Staticians’ Ambition: Govermentality, Modernity and National Legibility.” Israel Studies 9 (no. 2): 121-149. 8 Questions: Is there a politics of numbers? Why do we need to understand stastical systems in their own right? What effects do the production and distribution of statistical information have on politics and society? Oct. 27: Politics and Economics: Overcoming Jealousy of Trade Reading: Hont Suggested Readings: Adam Smith, TMS and the Wealth of Nations David Hume on trade. Questions: Why the jealousy of trade needed to be overcome in the first place? Who stood to benefit trade? What is the nature of exchange? What are the economic limits to national politics? What kind of commercial nation state developed? Was List right? Nov. 3: Economic and Political Transformations Reading: Polanyi Suggested Readings: Fred Block (2007). “Understanding the Diverging Trajectories of the United States and Western Europe: A New-Polanyian Analysis.” Politics and Society 35 (No. 1 March0: 3-33. Giovanni Capoccia (2005). “The Defense of Democracy: Actors and Strategies in Comparative Perspective.” In his Defending Democracy. Reactions to Extremism in Inter War Europe. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 179-220. W. H.McNeill (2008). “Globalization: Long Term Process or New Era in Human Affairs?” New Global Studies 2 (no. 1)1-9. David E. Apter (2008). “Some Contrarian Perspectives on the Political Consequences of Globalization.” New Global Studies 2( no. 1); article 2 Questions: What does Polnanyi mean by exchange and market? Does he have a good understanding? Or is it more a political analysis coloured by 20the century reactions gone wrong? What are his contributions that remain valid today? In what ways, does Polanyi extends or modify the analysis by Hont? Nov. 10: Creating Human Capital Reading: Thelen Suggested Readings: Pepper Culpepper (2003). Creating Cooperation. How States Develop Human Capital. Ithaca: Cornelle University Press. Coleman, James (1988). “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American Journal of Sociology 94 (supplement), S95-120. 9 Eucken, Walter (1940, 1951). The Foundations of Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Garrett, G. and P. Lange (1991). “Political Responses to Interdependence: What’s Left of the Left?” International Organization 45 (4): 539-64. Lin, N. (1999). “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital.” Connections 22: 28-51. North, Douglass (1990). Institution, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press. North, Douglass (2005). Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Questions: How can human capital be created? What are the institutions that create it and as they emerge in Thelen? How do account for national variations? Does Thelen’s analysis can be used to accept or reject or modify Hont and Polanyi? If so, how? If not, why not? Nov. 17: The Primacy of Politics? Reading: Sheri Berman Suggested Readings: Daherendorf, Ralph (1967). Society and Democracy in Germany. New York: Norton. Rosselli, Carlo (1994). Liberal Socialism. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Steger, Manfred (1997). The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism. New York: Cambridge University Press. Craiutu, Aurelian (2003). Liberalism under Siege. The Political Thought of the French Doctrinaires. Lanham: Lexington Books. Danford, John W. (2004). Roots of Freedom. Wilmington, Del.: ISI Books. Guizot, F. (1828, 1997). The History of Civilization in Europe. New York: Penguin. Hall, John A. (1988). Liberalism. London: Paladin Books. Manin, Bernard (1997). The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McIlwain, Charles H. (1940). Constitutionalism Ancient and Modern. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Stepan, Alfred (2001). Arguing Comparative Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, chapter 2 in particular on approaches to the State. Hayek, F. A. (2004). “Freedom in the Welfare State.” In his The Constitution of Liberty, 253-396. Matthew E. Carnes and Isabella Mares (2007). “The Welfare State in Global Perspective.” In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics coed. by Carles Boix and Susan Stokes. New York: Oxford University Press, 86885. 10 De Swaan, A. (1988). In Care of the State. Health Care, Education and Welfare in Europe and America during the Modern Era. New York: Oxford University Press. James C. Scott (1998). Seeing Like a State. New Haven: Yale University Press, esp. parts 1, 2, and 4. Julia Lynch (2006). Age in the Welfare State. The Origins of Social Spending on Pensioniers, Workers and Children. New York: Cambridge University Press. Questions: Is social democracy a sharp break with liberalism and 19th century Europe? Did the previous century end with the triumph of social democracy? What made that possible? Can we identify the mechanisms of its success? And what’s left of Tocqueville’s argument about the importance of religion in modern times? And what happened to fears about democratic despotism and the interest in self-governance? What is the place of citizens in the advent of social democracy? Doe winning the electoral game trumps self-governance? Nov. 24: A Return to Polycentric Europe? Knowledge, Expertise and New Forms of Representation? Reading: Vibert Suggested Readings: Manent, Pierre (2006). A World Beyond Politics? A Defense of the Nation-State. Princeton: Princeton University Press. For a contrary view to Keating’s. Jouvenel, de Bertrand (1997ed.). Sovereignty. An Inquiry into the Political Good. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. Paul, T.V. and J. Ikenberry and J. H. Hall eds.(2003). The Nation State in Question. New York: Cambridge University Press. Stefan, Alfred (2001). “Modern Multinational Democracies: Transcending A Gellnerian Oxymoron.” In his Arguing Comparative Politics, 181-199. Jonathan Steinberg (1996). Why Switzerland. New York: Cambridge University Press Larry Siedentop (2000). Democracy in Europe. New York: Allen Lane Penguin Press Bartolini, Stefano (2005). Restructuring Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bellamy, Richard, V. Bufacchi and Dario Castiglione (1995). Democracy and Constitutional Culture in the Union of Europe. London: Lothian Foundation Press. Ostrom, Vincent (1987). The Political Theory of a Compound Republic. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Questions: What factors help to account for the rise of the unelected? How universal is this phenomenon? In what ways these are new forms of representation? What does the author mean by representation in the first place? And what is meant by division of 11 powers? Accountability of what kind? What are the problems of asymmetrical knowledge and the role of experts in democratic society? What kind of perspective about public services, public entrepreneurship and knowledge inform the analysis? What insights are worth pursuing and are applicable to the making of a European Union? Are such problems ordinary features of large political systems like federal systems in the USA and Canada? Dec. 1: Toward a Polycentric Europe: Unravelling the Unitary State and Moving Toward Multilevel Governance Reading: L. Hooghe and Gary Marks (2003). “Unraveling the Central State, but how? Types of Multi-level Governance.” American Political Science Review 97 (May): 233-243. G. Ekiert and S. Hanson, eds. (2003). Capitalism and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. Assessing the Legacy of Communist Rule. New York: Cambridge University Press. All the chapters are worth reading. For our purpose the following stand out: Herbert Kitschelt (2003). “Accounting for Postcommunist Regime Diversity: What counts for a good cause?” Paul Pierson (2003).”From Area Studies to Contextualized Comparisons.” Suggested Readings: Michael Keating (2001). Plurinational Democracy. Stateless Nations in a PostSovereignty Era. New York: Oxford University Press. Palmer, Tom G. (2003). Globalization and Culture. Homogeneity, Diversity, Identity, Liberty. Postdam: F. Neuman Foundation. Questions: What are the main types of multilevel governance that are discussed here? And how persuasive they are in coming to terms with the unraveling the unitary state in Europe, in East as in Western Europe, abeit for different reasons? How do we distinguish new forms of governance from the old ones? How do we account for change in Eastern Europe? What contributions to the study of Eruopean law and politics make when arrayed against the analysis by Vibert? What is the role of law, legislation and rule of law, in both? A return also to the revolutionary capacity of law? What kind of law? Only as legislation?