Dictators and Democrats: Comparative Politics

This article discusses the study of comparative politics, which involves the comparison of political institutions, domestic politics, and conflicts between countries. It also covers the role of political institutions, cultural ideologies, and political economy in the stability of a state. The article provides insights into the relevance of comparative politics in understanding the economic strengths, structure of the regime, and military strength of a country.

Running head: DICTATORS AND DEMOCRATS: COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Dictators and Democrats: Comparative Politics
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1DICTATORS AND DEMOCRATS: COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Comparative Politics
The term Comparative politics can be defined as the study of political institutions,
domestic politics as well as conflicts that exists between the countries. Comparative politics
involves comparison among countries by an emphasis on the key patterns of similarities as well
as dissimilarities. According to Fukuyama (1989), the mentioned politics does not possess
substantive focus but rather has a methodological focus. Lijphart (1971) argues that comparative
politics can be defined as a method of identifying similarities and differences between the
countries and hence has a substantive focus. As per my opinion, comparative politics is a highly
crucial aspect of political science that studies why other countries around the world function in a
certain way instead of focusing on the function of a specific country. This study, in turn, has
provided a better understanding of the economic strengths, structure of the regime and military
strength of the country.
Political institutions and the state
The political institution is referred to the organizations that create, enforce and applies
rules and regulation in a state (Dahl 1961). The chief role of the political institutions is to
mediate conflict an create governmental policies on the social system and economy and provide
representation to the populous. According to me, the presence of political parties in states has
both merits as well as demerits. In my opinion, political parties, if organized appropriately can
enhance the stability of a state. According to Carl's posts, ethnically homogeneous society is not
the only crucial factor when it comes to the stability of a state. According to him, governance
within a nation-state is one of the most crucial factors when it comes to the stability of a nation. I

2DICTATORS AND DEMOCRATS: COMPARATIVE POLITICS
agree with the fact since I think appropriate governance can maintain stability in the nation even
during lower per capita income.
Nathan, in his post, stated that the continuous ideological conflict between the political
parties demonstrate a radical approach that hiders their chief purpose of focusing on their main
purpose.
Nations and Societies (cultural ideology)
As being stated by Karl Marx, the ruling class manipulates the culture of a society that is
their beliefs, perceptions, values and explanation and this phenomenon is known as cultural
hegemony. The four major ideologies that are followed by nations and societies across the world
include Capitalism, socialism, communism and Marxism (Huntington 1997). As per my opinion,
all the mentioned ideologies have their own sets of merits and demerits. Hence a nation should
consider the appropriateness of a certain ideology in accordance to the society before adopting it.
Political economy
Political economy is defined as the study of trade and production as well as their relation
with the rules and regulation, custom and governmental policies. According to me, in today's
world, the relevance of political economy in countries have got enhanced due to rising global
income inequality and the tendency towards ever greater concentration of wealth. The classic
theories of economics, according to researchers are insufficient for addressing and assessing the
crucial issues associated with the mentioned factors. Political economy, in contrast, because of
its belief that politics and economics are fundamentally insufficient has the potential to access
the relationship between states and market (Maarek 2008).

3DICTATORS AND DEMOCRATS: COMPARATIVE POLITICS

4DICTATORS AND DEMOCRATS: COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Reference list
Dahl, R 1961, Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city, Yale University Press,
New Haven, CT.
Fukuyama, F., 1989. The end of history?. The national interest, (16), pp.3-18.
Huntington, S.P., 1997. The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Penguin
Books India.
Lijphart, A., 1971. Comparative politics and the comparative method. American political science
review, 65(3), pp.682-693.
Maarek, P.J., 2008. Political marketing. The international encyclopedia of communication.