Suchergebnisse

Why, as a comparativist, did I find it compelling to carry out field research in over 20 countries on five different continents? Because comparative politics should be question-driven, not driven by methodology or existing data. Good questions led to new countries. My book on how Brazilian civilian elites were complicit in coups led to a comparative book on how to transform such civil–military relations in Brazil, Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay. My colleague Juan J Linz and I broadened the scope of questions of democratic transition theory by adding post-communist countries to the transition set. New questions and relevant new countries continue to emerge. What to do if more than one nation exists in a polity pursuing 'nation-state' policies? I helped create the concept of 'state-nation' and documented how 'multiple but complementary identities' were fostered in India. How did polities that respected the 'twin tolerations' emerge in Muslim-majority Indonesia, Senegal, and Tunisia?

In 2011, Tunisia achieved a successful democratic transition, albeit not yet a consolidation of democracy. It did so while adhering to a relationship between religion and politics that follows the pattern of what I have called the "twin tolerations." The first toleration is that of religious citizens toward the state. It requires that they accord democratically elected officials the freedom to legislate and govern without having to confront denials of their authority based on religious claims—such as the claim that "Only God, not man, can make laws." The second toleration requires that laws and officials must permit religious citizens, as a matter of right, to freely express their views and values within civil society, and to freely take part in politics, as long as religious activists and organizations respect other citizens' constitutional rights and the law.

AbstractSome polities have strong cultural diversity, some of which is territorially based and politically articulated by significant groups that, in the name of nationalism, and self-determination, advance claims forindependence.In this article such polities are defined as 'politically robustly multinational'. If the goal is peace and democracy in one state in such a polity, this article advances theoretical and empirical arguments to show that ideal typical 'nation-state' making policies are less appropriate than policies associated with new ideal type I construct called 'state-nation'. Countries discussed are Spain, Belgium, and Canada and the 'matched pair' of successful Tamil political integration via state nation policies in India, and failed Tamil political integration due to nation-state policies in Sri Lanka.

The contributions of this book to understanding modern federal systems in Latin America are assessed, focusing on the issues of institutional veto players in policy decisions, per George Tsebelis' approach (multiple references). Unitary systems can have one or two veto players, while federal systems can have up to four (lower chamber, upper cahmber, directly elected president, & constituent members of the federation). Twenty-three (23) countries with advanced economies are categorized according to their system & number of veto players. Mexico & Venezuela have three veto players, while Brazil & Argentina have four, & electorally generated institutional veto players, a distinctive set in the world. However, political party (partisan) veto players can also play a role offsetting the institutional veto players, as evidenced by events in Argentina & Brazil, & can lead to state dissolution, partial democratic breakdown, or democratic transition. The continuum between the demos-constraining & demos-enabling aspects of veto players is examined. 8 Tables, 2 Figures, 52 References. M. Pflum

Democratic federations vs. non-democratic systems wit federal features & mononational vs. multinational federations are first distinguished. Federal systems can be viewed along a democracy-constraining/democracy-enabling continuum in which all points along this continuum can impact policy, in contrast to theorist William H. Riker's position (multiple references), discussed here. This continuum framework is operationalized in four propositions about federalism, evaluated using data from India, Germany, Spain, the US, & Brazil on the degree of overrepresentation in the territorial chamber, the degree of policy-making competencies afforded to federal subunits, & the degree of polity-wide orientation & incentive systems for the party system. It is concluded that a comparative study of federalism, multinationalism, & democracy together provides a more powerful approach to the study of federalism than Riker's approach, & places the US as an extreme outlier with its democracy-constraining features. 7 Tables, 74 References. M. Pflum