'A gets B to do something that he or she would not otherwise do. Does this sum up the essence of political power?
'A GETS B TO DO SOMETHING THAT HE OR SHE WOULD NOT OTHERWISE DO'. DOES THIS SUM UP THE ESSENCE OF POLITICAL POWER? Questions of power are arguably the most important in the field of politics, and as such the concept of power is one of the most frequently discussed topics amongst political scientists. Power is such a wide concept that this essay will not be able to discuss motivation; that is, why an individual may want to exert power over another individual, although this is a crucial question when discussing this topic. Instead, this essay will focus on the 'faces of power' debate; the three widely recognised faces, decision-making, agenda-setting and preference-shaping as well as Foucault's research into a fourth face of power. As well as outlining the arguments put forward by political scholars, this essay will critically analyse each theory and ultimately sum up the essence of political power. In "The Concept of Power" (1957) Robert Dahl looks at the relationship between preferences and decisions before concluding that power is a one dimensional concept regarding the power of A to affect the decisions of B. Dahl's view of power is that it is quantifiable by counting the number of decisions that are made and determine that whoever has the most decisions in their favour is the most powerful. While analysing Dahl's one dimensional view of power, Hay stated that "the
Do you agree with Scruton (1990) that the main aim of Conservatism is preservation of a pre existing social order?
Do you agree with Scruton (1990) that the main aim of Conservatism is 'preservation of a pre existing social order?' Student Number - 110118471 The issue of analysing the aims of any political ideology is difficult mainly due to the often fractured and conflicting natures of ideologies. There are significant issues arising particularly from the analysis of Conservatism, largely due to its positional stance as an approach which focuses on what is rather than normative claims. Such problems necessarily lead to caution when debating Conservatism, as Eccleshall asserts "the ideology poses serious conceptual difficulties" (2003, p.48). However, when analysing Conservatism, it is evident that Scruton's definition is on the right lines, however I shall argue that such a definition of the main aim of Conservatism is too broad, and that more focus should be on the preservation of appropriate pre existing social orders and the preservation of stability. Moreover, when put into practice, there are numerous examples of reformist branches within Conservatism which in fact go beyond Scruton's claim and seek to reinstate social orders of the past. One of the key premises in the assertion that Conservatism's main aim is the preservation of a pre existing social order is the concept that society is going through a process of degeneration. The idea of regression is as Goodwin (1992) asserts,
Has Neofunctionalism Been Superseded By A New 'Liberal Intergovernmentalism" As Currently The Most Convincing Theoretical Explanation of European Political Integration?
Has Neofunctionalism Been Superseded By A New 'Liberal Intergovernmentalism" As Currently The Most Convincing Theoretical Explanation of European Political Integration? From an ambitious project originally envisaged to remove the catastrophe of war from such a war-torn continent, the European project has proceeded in 'fits and starts'. Since its inception, there has been much debate regarding what forces drive the integration process forward. Why now, when interstate war in Europe seems impossible, do member states continue to 'pool' their sovereignty in so many areas? Two theories have dominated previous attempts to answer the question of "how and why states cease to be wholly sovereign, how and why they voluntarily mingle, merge and mix with their neighbours, so as to lose the factual attributes of sovereignty."1 Neofunctionalism, the idea that the integration process, once started, develops its own momentum for further integration, saw the height of popularity in the 1960s, following the initial success of the ECSC/EEC and the hugely influential theoretical explanation by Ernst Haas. The second theory, Liberal Intergovernmentalism, surfaced in the 1990s and was championed by Andrew Moravcsik. It saw flaws in neofunctionalist thinking and instead offered an alternative account in which the integrative process was always, and remains, in the hands of national governments;
'A gets B to do something that he or she would not otherwise do'. Does this sum up the essence of political power?
'A gets B to do something that he or she would not otherwise do'. Does this sum up the essence of political power? Political power has been described as an "essentially contested concept1" and for good reason. Of all of the concepts in political science, power is probably that which is debated most often. This is perhaps unsurprising due to its importance within the discipline. Heywood suggests that "without doubt, students of politics are students of power2". The quote in the question refers to Robert Dahl's "intuitive idea of power3" outlined in his early article 'The Concept of Power4'. It is also the most commonly used 'definition' of power; however, to what extent does it describe the nature and essence of political power? As the extensive debate suggests, there are many problems when defining power. As the 'Oxford Dictionary of Politics explains, issues of "Intentionality", "Comparability and Quantifiability" and "Time and Causation5'" make arriving at a definition very difficult. Without Intentionality, it argues, "we are left with a paradoxical and useless concept of power... the concept of power becomes vague to the point of meaningless". Also, for a universal concept of power, it must allow for comparative analyses in the form of "A has more power than C in context x" or "A has more power than anybody else in context x" for example. This quote in the question
What are the strengths and weaknesses of a positivist/empiricist approach to political analysis?
WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF A POSITIVIST/EMPIRICIST APPROACH TO POLITICAL ANALYSIS? 21-Jan-09 560011924 POL1014A 807 What are the strengths and weaknesses of a positivist/empiricist approach to political analysis? Introduction introduction..... Positivists test their theories through direct observation. They contend that as they intend to answer empirical questions, direct observation will maintain objectivity due to them not considering reasoning and understanding behind the act. Direct observation is a quantitative method. For example if looking at voting behaviour, positivists would observe variables such as if someone votes, their age, race and class. This excludes personal motivation of an individual. From their raw results, positivists can construct correlations between the variables in order to establish a predictive model as to who will vote. This scientific method means that the political scientist's own views and experiences will not bias the results. However, many have criticized the idea that positivist methodology is objective. Within positivism, one of the tenants is that knowledge can only come from experience. Theories can only be compiled and tested if one is seeking to establish a casual relationship from prior experience. For example, if a positivist saw a woman crashing a car he may think that all women are bad drivers. He would then
'All political parties are prey to the iron law of oligarchy.' Discuss
'All political parties are prey to the iron law of oligarchy.' Discuss The 'iron law of oligarchy' was a phrase first used by the German sociologist Roberto Michels in his book Political Parties, published in 1916. From historic insight and studies of both the German SPD and the Italian Socialist parties, Michels concluded that all parties, whatever their initial intensions, would be controlled by a political elite or oligarchy, who separated themselves, by the control of the bureaucracy, from the masses of their own party ranks. The reasons for this tendency towards oligarchy were the natural necessity for society to have a ruling class, the self fuelling desire for party officials to gain and retain power, and the effectiveness that centralised parties had in a political environment. Since 1916 Michels' work has gained a huge amount of support, particularly as the pressures of parties to centralise power is becoming more important in an increasingly competitive political world, but it is not without its critics. Opponents claim that Michels and his followers paint too black and white a picture and while there does seem to be a strong tendency for oligarchy to form, it can not be said to be an 'iron rule', as there are a number of examples where political parties have not taken on such a form. Much of Michels 'iron rule' theory was influenced heavily by Karl Marx'
Explain the economic and political deficiencies of the C A P
Explain the economic and political deficiencies of the C A P To answer this question it is essential first to state the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy, as stated in Article 39 of the Treaty of Rome. ) to increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress and by ensuring the rational development of agricultural production and the optimum utilisation of all factors of production in particular labour. 2) To ensure thereby a 'fair' standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture. 3) to stabilize markets. 4) to provide certainty of supplies. 5) to ensure supplies to consumers at reasonable prices. The second part of the essay looks at why such a policy was deemed necessary, and also how far politics can account for the consistent failure of the Community to deal with its problems. But the first part concerns why in economic terms the policy is fundamentally flawed. The problems of the C.A.P. go deeper than economic theorising as to why the policy itself has created imbalances within the agricultural system. They are fundamental. `Economic logic dictates agriculture to be a major contributor to economic development. This is true especially in the primary stages, whereby it releases resources to other sectors. By increasing its own productivity the labour
Critically assess Rhodes' (1997) argument that 'Policy networks of resource dependent organisations are a characteristic of the British policy process.'
Richard Swann Critically assess Rhodes' (1997) argument that 'Policy networks of resource dependent organisations are a characteristic of the British policy process.' Policy networks first emerged in the early 1980's. The origins of the theory were constructed by Richardson and Jordan however it was the work of Professor Rod Rhodes that moved the theory and our understanding of it on. Rhodes (1997) argument that, "policy networks of resource dependent organisations are a characteristic of the British political system," was one of his core themes in his book Understanding Governance. Despite the fact that Rhodes has written extensively on this area it is still debatable to what extent this statement is true. In an effort to assess Rhodes argument as well as considering the usefulness of the policy network approach I will examine it in the context of a policy area. My chosen case study is the internal market in health focusing on the G.P. fund holding scheme. For the purpose of looking at the relevance of Rhodes argument in the contexts of the policy process in this area I will evaluate policy networks activities from the 1991 Conservative reforms till the present New Labour government. The policy process in Britain in resent years can best be described as complex and hard to define. In British politics policy is not constructed in one single area, the policy process is not
How presidential is the premiership of Tony Blair.
HOW PRESIDENTIAL IS THE PREMIERSHIP OF TONY BLAIR? INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT The traditional view of the UK's constitutional arrangement of power in government has been that decision making in the executive rests with the cabinet, with the Prime Minister acting as "first amongst equals". However, this has been challenged by many recently, who argue Margaret Thatcher in particular challenged and now Tony Blair has almost eliminated cabinet government, and is the most powerful Prime Minister in the modern era. Some have claimed that Blair is now more of a Presidential figure than a Prime Minister working within the context of cabinet government, in that he exercises personal control over the executive branch and we have an executive decision and policy making process based on an individual rather than a collective body. Obviously there are some major differences between a Presidential system of government and the current British system. In the US, which is Presidential, you vote directly for who you want to become President. In Britain, you are voting for an individual who will become an MP in the Commons. The public has no direct say over who becomes PM; they have been chosen internally within the particular party. However, exit polls from the 2001 British general election do suggest that voters are increasingly influenced by the personalities of the party leaders1. During
Outline the principle ideological factors of Thatcherism
Outline the principle ideological factors of Thatcherism "Thatcherism represents something qualitatively new in British politics." `This statement, made by Stuart Hall in 1980, is a good starting point for a discussion of Thatcherism, raising as it does, several key questions. `Firstly, what is Thatcherism? Is it an ideology or is it, as Riddell believes, "an instinct, a series of moral values and an approach to leadership rather than an ideology"? (A view shared by Gamble, who regarded Thatcherism as being "essentially statecraft rather than ideology.") `Secondly, if Thatcherism is an ideology (and the majority of political commentators clearly see it as being so) then is it, as Hall claims, a new ideology or is it simply a continuation of traditional Conservative philosophy? Is it possible to distinguish between Conservatism and Thatcherism or are we in danger of losing sight of them altogether under an "overelaborate edifice of theory"? `We might even ask legitimately if Thatcherism is purely a British phenomenon (a view Beetham regards as one - dimensional) or whether or not it forms part of what Douglas calls the "international New Right movement". It may seem a paradoxical question but it is important in identifying that some of the most significant influences on Thatcherism have an undeniably international outlook. `"According to Hall and Gamble, Thatcherism is a
