chapter 4 cpo2002 lecture

Political CultureChapter Four

Pearson Publishing 2011

Political Culture

• What effect do differences in ethnicity, nationalism, and religion have on political culture?

• How do political scientists study political culture?

• Why is generalized trust important?

• Premise of this chapter: Differences in political culture helps us understand why political institutions work differently in different societies, and the consequences they have for people’s capabilities.


Culture & Political Culture

• Culture is a society’s broad sense of shared values, beliefs, norms, and orientations toward the world

• Political Culture is more specific - a society’s shared values, beliefs, norms, and orientations toward politics

• It helps shape how people think about their country’s political system, the decision-making process, and their role in that process

• Political scientists primarily use three approaches to studying culture and political culture to explain similarities and differences among countries:

• Social Character

• Congruence

• Social Capital


Pitfalls of Cultural Analysis

• These pitfalls should be avoided:• Don’t rely on stereotypes - use evidence about

what people actually believe• Don’t assume that people are all cultural robots

- they’re not. Individuals can step outside cultural norms.

• Be careful about making sweeping statements (i.e.: “Chinese believe...”)


Social Character Approach

• Argues that deeply held cultural beliefs become embedded in state institutions• Ex: Differences in behavior and beliefs between the

American colonies and Canada explain why the two countries developed very different political institutions

• Seeks to construct political culture from a wide range of evidence, including survey questions

• Contributes to our understanding of the kinds of beliefs that help create and sustain effective democracy


Strengths and Weaknesses of the Social Character Approach

• Strengths• Provides a rich sense of cultural nuance• Draws on a wide range of evidence

• Weaknesses• Requires researchers to have considerable knowledge of the

country they are studying, including language fluency• Is only effective for comparison when countries are very

similar to each other - does not lend itself to comparing large numbers of countries


Congruence Approach

• Claims that a lack of congruence between a country’s political culture and institutions creates political instability

• What kind of political culture is necessary to maintain stable democratic institutions?• One argument: (Almond and Verba) a mix of citizen

involvement in politics is the best model• participants - do not do much more than vote• subjects - obey laws but are not politically active• parochial - ignorant about politics


Congruence Approach

• In contrast: Inglehart and Welzel argue that an activist political culture is important to maintaining effective democracies

• Self-expression values are key (freedom of speech, tolerance, trust in others)• Provide motivations to speak out and challenge

authoritarian systems• Create societal bridging behavior, rather than

bonding


Bridging vs. Bonding

Bridging Behavior

• Based on mutually agreed interests and empathy for others

• Views people as individuals, not “in-groups” and “out-groups”

• Strengthens generalized trust

• Based on mutually agreed interests and empathy for others

• Views people as individuals, not “in-groups” and “out-groups”

• Strengthens generalized trust

Bonding Behavior• People identify with their

“in-group” based on ethnicity, race, language, or religion and discriminate against outsiders

• Views people as “in-groups” and “out-groups” and not as individuals

• Weakens generalized trust

• People identify with their “in-group” based on ethnicity, race, language, or religion and discriminate against outsiders

• Views people as “in-groups” and “out-groups” and not as individuals

• Weakens generalized trust


Social Capital Approach

• Seeks to explain why people manage to collaborate in some societies, but not in others

• Social Capital - the ability of members in a group to cooperate, based on “trust among people in a society and their ability to work together for common purposes” (Hamilton, xvii)• In other words, relationships matter

• Social Dilemma - even if all understand the need for cooperation, it will only come about if individuals trust that others are also going to cooperate• Ex: tax collection in Russia compared to Sweden


Generalized Trust

• Societies require generalized trust to achieve this kind of cooperation• The belief that most people can be trusted outside of one’s

close family and friends• The most basic element of social capital• Accomplished through bridging behavior• Generalized Reciprocity - trust will be reciprocated in the

future, not just in the present• Has a mutually-reinforcing relationship with institutional

performance


Generalized Trust

• How have the internet and social networking sites affected social capital? Do they strengthen or weaken generalized trust? Is it bonding or bridging behavior?


In Brief: Comparing the 3 Approaches

Social Character Approach

Societies have prevailing cultural beliefs and values that give them a distinct character and shape behavior, beliefs, and institutional arrangements.

Congruence Approach

A lack of congruence between a country’s political culture and its institutions is likely to create political instability. There is a strong correlation between the strength of self-expression values in a country and the level of democracy

Social Capital Approach

Achieving collaboration on shared goals for large numbers of people (like in a country) requires generalized trust based on the norm of generalized reciprocity.


Politics of Identity

• Individuals can have multiple identities• Ex: Catholic, Italian-American, Republican

• The relative importance of these identities varies from culture to culture

• Three identities play especially important roles in politics, driving political competition over recognition and government resources• Ethnicity• Nationality• Religion


Ethnicity

• “A sense of collective belonging based on language, history, culture, religion.” (Varshney, 275)

• Very few countries are ethnically homogeneous• First and foremost a social identity• Three trends account for the political importance of

ethnicity in advanced democracies• increasing ethnic diversity• rise of identity politics• adoption of multicultural policies


In Brief: Ethnicity and Race

• Racial Categories are based on observable characteristics such as skin color, hair type, and facial features

• Ethnic Identity is usually based on linguistic and cultural practices

• These definitions are clearly not always precise and are often misused by people in power• Ex: In the American South of the 1930s a person was

“black” if any ancestor was black, while in Brazil there are many gradations of mixed race


Ethnicity & Conflict

• Political struggles based on ethnicity can be pursued peacefully and within the confines of political institutions

• In some countries these conflicts resort to violence:• mob violence• forcible removals of one ethnic group from a

territory• Ex: the removal of Native Americans to reservations in the

US

• genocide• Ex: The Holocaust; Rwandan genocide in 1994


Nationalism

• A sense of pride in one’s nation and a desire to control a sovereign political/territorial state representing that nation• Nation - a group of people sharing a common identity

that derives from either having a state of their own or desiring to do so

• Unlike ethnicity, nationalism is inherently political• Sometimes appropriated by universities seeking to

create senses of loyalty among sports fans (ex: University of Georgia’s “Bulldog Nation”)


Religion

• Religious identity is not inherently political, but has become the basis of political conflict and violence in many countries• Ex: Hindus and Muslims in India

• Three explanations exist for why violence erupts among ethnic, national, and religious groups• Primordialism• Instrumentalism• Constructivism


Explaining Identity Violence

Primordialism

Assumes inter-group conflict is inherent in human nature - people need enemies to define who “we” and “they” are.

Weakness - fails to explain change in identity or persistent peace between some groups.

Instrumentalism

Argues violence is provoked by political leaders who manipulate symbols and beliefs to pit groups against each other for political benefit.

Weakness - leaders do not have unlimited power to manipulate identities and must do so within existing conditions.

Constructivism

Asserts that identities are not given, but socially constructed - they are constantly being refined and redefined over time. The most persuasive explanation.

Weakness - still has trouble explaining why conflict occurs at specific times in specific locations.


Political Culture, Identity, and the Good Society

• Political culture affects capabilities when it is used to construct ethnic or racial categories that privilege some people and penalize others

• Example:• In many Latin American countries biased political cleavages

have been created between descendants of Spaniards and indigenous peoples

• Latin American countries with high percentages of indigenous people have the highest levels of inequality



• Another way political culture affects capabilities is associated with levels of generalized trust.

• Citizens living in countries with high levels of generalized trust are more likely to be tolerant toward people different from themselves and support providing resources and opportunities to develop their capabilities.



• Hall and Lamont suggest that some cultural repertoires are better at helping people cope with “daily life”

• Societies that share narratives extending a citizen’s moral community beyond their immediate family, ethnic, or racial group promote better overall health and societal support.


Evaluating Generalized Trust

• Do higher levels of generalized trust promote higher levels of capabilities?

• By looking at indicators such as infant mortality, literacy, and crime rates we see modest support for this hypothesis• There are numerous alternative explanations and outliers,

however• There is no relationship between generalized trust and

democracy


Figure 4.1Pearson Publishing 2011

Conclusions

• Comparative politics uses three methods for studying political culture: social character, congruence, and social capital.

• There are three major forms of political identity: ethnicity, nationalism, and religion.

• Some societies experience violence related to identity differences.• This violence can be explained by three arguments:

primordialism, instrumentalism, and constructivism

• We also discussed the many ways political culture affects capabilities.


Critical Thinking Questions

• Why do political scientists make a distinction between culture and political culture? Why not simply use culture and dispense with the concept of political culture?

• Why would the social character approach have difficulty explaining why Mexico and the United States have such different political institutions?

• In The Civic Culture Almond and Verba suggest democratic stability does not require that all citizens be extremely well informed and active in politics. In fact, it is helpful for stability to have a mix of participants, subjects, and parochials. On the other hand, Inglehart and Welzel argue that high levels of self-expression values are essential for healthy democracy. Which set of authors do you believe has a better case and why?


Critical Thinking Questions

• What does the social capital approach add to our understanding of politics beyond what the social character and congruence approaches contribute?

• Why do most political scientists believe primordial and instrumental explanations of ethnic violence are unsatisfactory, and suggest social constructivism as a better explanation?


In Depth: Kenya’s Ethnic Violence and Capabilities

• Politicians in Kenya often win support by appealing to ethnic groups - once in office politicians then deliver patronage to their supporter groups to stay in office

• The 2007 Presidential election is an example of violence between rival politicians and their supporting ethnic groups• President Kibaki (supported by the Kikuyus) was challenged by Raila

Odinga (supported by the Luos and Kalenjins)

• The election was rigged in favor of Kibaki, and angry mobs of Kalnjins began violently killing Kikuyus

• The killings only ended when the leaders agreed to a coalition government in 2008


Comparative Political Analysis:Is ethnic diversity the root cause of civil wars?

Question

• Over the last 65 years civil wars are becoming more common and more destructive than wars between states - what causes them? Fearon and Laitin try to answer this question.

Hypotheses

• Hypothesis 1: ethnic and religious diversity are the root cause of civil wars

• Hypothesis 2: state weakness is the root cause of civil war


Comparative Political Analysis:Is ethnic diversity the root cause of civil wars?

Operationalizing Concepts

• Civil War - fighting between states and non-state groups resulting in at least 1000 deaths, with averages of 100 deaths/year

• Ethnic Diversity - an index based on the probability of two randomly drawn individuals coming from different ethnic groups

• State Weakness - measured using per capita income

Results

• There is no support for the hypothesis that ethnic diversity causes civil wars, while state weakness is a better explanation.


chapter 4 cpo2002 lecture

Education

countrys political culture

kind of political culture

activist political culture

world political culture

political instability

political congruen

generalized trust people

bonding pearson publishing