Politicologie samenvatting.pdf

# Introduction to political science and core concepts This section introduces the fundamental aspects of political science, defining politics, exploring the dynamics of politicization and depoliticization, and outlining the analytical tools of the discipline, such as concepts, models, and theories, alongside the measurement of power. ## 1. Introduction to political science and core concepts ### 1.1 Politics: Definition and scope Politics is broadly defined as everything related to the steering of a society. This steering is necessary due to societal diversity, scarcity of resources, and the inherent potential for conflict, requiring mechanisms for resolution and discussion [7](#page=7). #### 1.1.1 Variation in politics The scope of politics varies on two main levels: * **Societal level:** * **Territorial:** Pertains to entities like states and regions [7](#page=7). * **Non-territorial:** Includes associations and religious organizations [7](#page=7). * **Degree of variation:** The impact of these political structures on daily life and the voluntariness of membership can differ significantly [7](#page=7). * **Content level (scope):** * The boundaries of political intervention are fluid. For example, the role of the state can range from providing minimal services to comprehensive welfare provision [7](#page=7). #### 1.1.2 Defining civil and political rights * **Civil rights:** Encompass civil and private law, governing the relationships between individual citizens [7](#page=7). * **Political rights:** Relate to constitutional law, concerning decision-making processes that transcend individual actions, the relationship between citizens and the government, and the functioning of the government as a collective entity. Socio-economic rights, such as the right to a dignified life, also represent a demand for societal steering [7](#page=7) [8](#page=8). #### 1.1.3 Forms and regimes Political systems can be categorized based on their underlying principles, such as democratic versus authoritarian, or unitarian versus federal structures [8](#page=8). ### 1.2 Politicization and depoliticization * **Politicization:** The process of making a theme or subject a matter for political steering [8](#page=8). * **Depoliticization:** The act of removing the political character from something [8](#page=8). #### 1.2.1 Private versus public domains * **Private:** Domains where individuals can act and judge autonomously, and where collective intervention or steering is neither needed nor desired [8](#page=8). * **Public:** Domains of social life where people interact, and collective decisions are necessary for the organization of that social life [8](#page=8). ### 1.3 Political science as a discipline Political science adheres to scientific rules, including: 1. **Intellectual distance:** Maintaining objectivity and managing bias by embracing doubt, presenting negative findings, and practicing reflexivity (questioning one's own assumptions) [8](#page=8). 2. **Systematic data collection and analysis:** Identifying regularities, patterns, and facilitating comparisons [8](#page=8). 3. **Conscious choice of techniques:** Employing qualitative and quantitative methods relevant to the research question [9](#page=9). 4. **Openness and transparency:** Upholding research ethics, transparent reporting, peer review, and open access [9](#page=9). #### 1.3.1 Instruments of political science Political science utilizes several key instruments for analysis: * **Concepts:** These are defined terms that delineate specific ideas. For instance, Robert Dahl distinguished between the ideal type of "democracy" and the empirical practice of "polyarchy". Polyarchy, meaning "many rulers," is characterized by [9](#page=9): * Control over governance by elected representatives [9](#page=9). * Free and fair elections [9](#page=9). * Suffrage and the right to be elected for most adults [9](#page=9). * Freedom of expression [9](#page=9). * Access to alternative information, free from government propaganda [9](#page=9). * Freedom of association [9](#page=9). * Responsiveness and accountability of government and parties to voters [9](#page=9). Concepts serve as "data containers" to categorize institutions, behavior, and processes, acting as examples of broader phenomena [9](#page=9). * **Models:** These simplify empirical complexity and map relationships between processes, phenomena, or behaviors, akin to scale models or maps. Easton's model is a circular model that reduces reality to facilitate comparison and understand the relationship between actors and processes, including the functioning and legitimacy of "gatekeepers" [10](#page=10) . * **Theories:** These are statements about relationships that generate expectations which can be verified or tested through hypotheses. They describe probabilistic relationships rather than absolute laws. It is crucial to distinguish between causation and correlation [10](#page=10). ### 1.4 Power and the state: Core concepts #### 1.4.1 Power as a central concept Power is considered a central concept, as no society can exist without it. Power is necessary for order, establishing rules that differentiate desired from undesired behavior, and creating binding obligations and rights. A key question is when and under what circumstances the exercise of power is justified, often involving public input and rules governing its execution [10](#page=10). * **Rules:** Can be formal (laws) or informal (norms, standards, agreements) [10](#page=10). * **Coercion:** Rules that are binding and imposed imply the use of power, regardless of their origin or perceived legitimacy [10](#page=10). #### 1.4.2 Max Weber's contributions to understanding power Max Weber (1864-1920) defined power as the possibility of imposing one's will on others, even against resistance. He distinguished power from **authority (gezag)**, which is the exercise of power that is recognized as legitimate and is practically accepted, leading to more sustainable power with less active enforcement [11](#page=11). ##### 1.4.2.1 Typology of authority Weber identified three ideal types of authority: 1. **Traditional:** Based on established custom and historical precedent. Its legitimacy is verifiable by observing whether decisions, systems, or organizations have societal support [11](#page=11). 2. **Charismatic:** Derived from the personality of the power-holder. Its legitimacy is assessed theoretically or philosophically against norms, values, or moral principles [11](#page=11). 3. **Rational-legal:** Based on respect for established rules and procedures [11](#page=11). #### 1.4.3 Key insights on power and authority * **Power is not always visible:** It exists as an abstract capacity distinct from force, which is a concrete act of coercion [11](#page=11). * **Authority rests on descriptive legitimacy:** This means it is accepted in practice, but it does not imply that everyone finds the rules normatively legitimate, potentially leading to civil disobedience [11](#page=11). #### 1.4.4 Measuring power Robert Dahl, in his 1961 work "Who Governs?", defined power as the ability of actor A to ensure that actor B performs an action that B would not otherwise have performed. Power is seen as a capacity inherent in social and formal relationships, constructed through these interactions. This definition often presupposes conflict and observable behavior, assuming a conflict of interest between A and B leading to a change in B's behavior. Violence and coercion may be implied for non-compliance [11](#page=11) [12](#page=12). ##### 1.4.4.1 Types of power 1. **Visible power (Dahl):** The ability to make decisions and issue commands. Researchers focus on "who decides?" [12](#page=12). 2. **Invisible power (Bachrach and Baratz):** Recognizes that focusing solely on conflict and decision outcomes is too narrow. It highlights the importance of the "mobilization of bias," where certain issues are systematically kept off the agenda (non-decision making) to maintain the status quo. This involves the negative control of the agenda and agenda setting. Researchers here ask, "Who decides what gets decided?" [12](#page=12). 3. **Diffuse power (Lukes):** Focuses on how people's ideas and preferences are shaped. This relates to cultural-ideological hegemony, where certain ideas are normalized and reflect the interests of dominant groups, creating an overarching cultural framework that legitimizes these ideas. The status of normality masks the arbitrariness and origin of these ideas [12](#page=12) [13](#page=13). #### 1.4.5 Steven Lukes' radical view on power Steven Lukes criticized earlier approaches for not accounting for power dynamics that are not traceable to concrete individuals or specific actions. He introduced the concept of **diffuse power** as power that cannot be attributed to specific actors but arises from the organization of the political system itself. This system shapes people's preferences and conceptions, making their "true interests" unidentifiable and potentially masking latent conflicts [13](#page=13) . #### 1.4.6 Michel Foucault's perspective on power Michel Foucault viewed power as circular and not a one-way process exclusive to power-holders. Power is exercised and accepted or undergone. Power relations are never entirely stable, allowing for resistance and protest, and power continuously circulates within the political system [13](#page=13) . #### 1.4.7 The centrality of the state The state is the dominant form of contemporary politics, characterized by a fixed structure, sovereignty over a territory, a monopoly on violence, and recognition in international law (external sovereignty) [13](#page=13). --- # The state and its legitimacy The state and its legitimacy explores the foundational concepts of the state, its formation, the significance of its rules and governing documents, and the critical element of its legitimacy, drawing on historical and social contract theories. ## 2. The state and its legitimacy The state is identified as the dominant form of contemporary politics, characterized by a fixed structure that exerts sovereign control over a territory. This control includes a monopoly on the use of legitimate force and international recognition as an independent entity, referred to as external sovereignty. It functions as a public institution distinct from the broader community, responsible for applying laws, levying taxes, and managing its personnel [13](#page=13) [14](#page=14). ### 2.1 The formation of the state The process of state formation involves several key developments: * **Concentration of power resources:** Centralizing the means of power within a defined structure [14](#page=14). * **Legitimization:** Establishing and maintaining public acceptance of the state's authority [14](#page=14). * **De-personalization of authority:** Shifting allegiance from individual rulers to the abstract concept of the state and its institutions [14](#page=14). * **Homogenization:** Unifying populations through shared language, law, culture, and practices, leading to the emergence of the modern nation-state [14](#page=14). * **Establishment of own rules:** Creating and enforcing a constitutional framework [14](#page=14). ### 2.2 The importance of enforceable rules and constitutions The functioning of a state heavily relies on enforceable rules and a constitution. #### 2.2.1 The role of enforceable rules * **Monopoly on legitimate violence:** The state's primary tool for enforcing its rules is its monopoly on legitimate violence. This means that only the state, through its designated agencies, is permitted to use force, and this use is itself subject to established rules. Citizens and private organizations are generally prohibited from using violence, with exceptions such as lawful self-defense [14](#page=14). #### 2.2.2 The functions of a constitution A constitution serves several vital functions: * **Defining the state:** It outlines the state's territory and boundaries [14](#page=14). * **Establishing institutions and their operation:** It specifies the structure and functions of state institutions, including principles like the separation of powers (trias politica) and the role of constitutional courts [14](#page=14). * **Guaranteeing individual freedoms and rights:** It upholds the rule of law, protecting individuals against arbitrary state actions and serving as a bulwark against absolutism, where the ruler's will dictates law, exemplified by the phrase "car tel est notre bon plaisir" [14](#page=14). > **Tip:** Understanding the distinction between the state (a permanent entity) and the government (the current body of people in power) is crucial. The state endures through the succession of governments, even as specific powers may change. The political system is a broader concept that encompasses the state and civil society, while the government refers to the administrative apparatus dealing with both external and internal relations [15](#page=15). ### 2.3 State legitimacy Legitimacy refers to the acceptance of the state's authority by its citizens. Different philosophical perspectives have explored its origins and nature. #### 2.3.1 Historical perspectives * **Plato (427–347 BCE):** Plato advocated for rule by an unselfish elite, viewing society as an organic whole analogous to the human body, with strict labor specialization promoting social harmony. He proposed a top-down leadership model where individual will is subordinate to the state's interests and emphasized strong state control over arts, literature, and education to shape citizens. His ideal rulers were "king-philosophers," rejecting democracy in favor of rule by those with true wisdom [15](#page=15). * **Aristotle (383–322 BCE):** Aristotle viewed humans as inherently social beings striving for *eudaimonia*, a good, meaningful, and fulfilled life, which is achieved through virtue and developed by repeated actions. He considered political participation essential for a full human life, with the state acting as a framework for self-realization, both supportive and limiting. His ideal involved direct democracy where participation held intrinsic value, fostering better individuals through debate, the application of reason, and the development of virtues, placing less emphasis on tradition and hierarchy than Plato. The ideal polis, for Aristotle, was one of equality and dialogue, though he also warned of the dangers of manipulation within state norms [15](#page=15) [16](#page=16). #### 2.3.2 Social contract theories Social contract theories posit that the state originates from an agreement among individuals who, though born free and sovereign, voluntarily cede a portion of their power to a governing authority. This is a thought experiment often used to justify existing political arrangements or to understand the implicit contracts formed in the past [16](#page=16). * **Hobbes (1588–1679):** Hobbes viewed the social contract as a necessity to escape a "state of nature" characterized by *bellum omnium contra omnes* (the war of all against all). He argued that the natural state, driven by maximal freedom and the "right of the strongest" rather than morality, leads to constant conflict and a *de facto* lack of freedom because no one can truly enjoy their liberties. Self-interest, particularly the desire for survival, promotes voluntary submission to a sovereign capable of enforcing order and limiting natural aggressive tendencies. Hobbes's *Leviathan* advocates for an absolute, centralized state that prioritizes the enforceability of rules and order above all else [16](#page=16) [17](#page=17). * **Locke (1632–1704):** Locke proposed that the social contract serves to limit uncertainty within a state of relative equality and freedom in nature. While reason and the possibility of coexistence exist, conflict and legal uncertainty are present, making a formal system of laws necessary. Locke advocated for a rights system, the separation of public and private spheres, and a government that acts as a neutral arbiter in disputes, crucially, one that is itself bound by the rules. His philosophy supports constitutional democracy [17](#page=17). * **Rousseau (1712–1778):** Rousseau emphasized popular sovereignty and the *volonté générale* (general will), which he saw as indivisible and distinct from the sum of individual wills (*volontés particulières*). For Rousseau, the people's will should not be represented but directly executed, with the legislative power residing with the people. He viewed the social contract as a gradual process, driven by basic needs and the instinct for self-preservation, alongside natural feelings of compassion and solidarity. The departure from the natural state occurs through civilization processes that establish regulatory frameworks for coexistence. In Rousseau's view, power originates from below, with the people, and the contract is not a one-time transfer of power; the government remains accountable to the people [17](#page=17). --- # Political cleavages and ideologies Political cleavages are deep-seated societal divisions that mobilize groups and influence political behavior, often shaped and articulated by distinct ideologies [18](#page=18). ### 3.1 Understanding political cleavages Political cleavages are not arbitrary but emerge from specific societal structures and value systems. These value systems form the basis for self-identification, political organization, and mobilization, ultimately translating into voting behavior. A cleavage is defined as a form of societal division leading to distinct, self-aware, and politically mobilizable groups [18](#page=18). #### 3.1.1 Types of political cleavages * **Complementary cleavages:** These cleavages overlap, intensifying societal conflict. Disagreements on one issue predict disagreements on others, fostering strong in-group identities and making compromise difficult [18](#page=18). * **Cross-cutting cleavages:** These cleavages intersect, reducing conflict intensity. While individuals may disagree on one issue, their experiences and perspectives on that issue differ across groups, leading to more heterogeneous groups with common ground, facilitating compromise [18](#page=18). #### 3.1.2 The impact of cleavages Cleavages significantly shape political landscapes by defining group identities and influencing political competition. They can exacerbate societal divisions or provide avenues for consensus-building, depending on their complementary or cross-cutting nature [18](#page=18). ### 3.2 Political ideologies Ideologies are coherent sets of ideas that provide frameworks for analyzing society, envisioning a desired future, and outlining a plan for societal transformation. They are based on specific views of human nature and societal models. Ideologies are closely linked to political cleavages, reflecting and interpreting these divisions. Historically, ideologies have been viewed through different lenses [18](#page=18) [19](#page=19): * **Value-neutral perspective:** Coined by Destutt de Tracy (1754-1836), this view sees ideologies as systems of ideas [18](#page=18). * **Misleading perspective:** Marx viewed ideologies as tools of the dominant class to maintain hegemony and create false consciousness [19](#page=19). * **Skeptical perspective:** Oakeshott contrasted ideological "blinders" with common sense [19](#page=19). ### 3.3 Classic cleavage models The work of Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan offered a historical and cross-national perspective on the formation of party systems based on cleavages. They identified common historical processes that led to similar cleavage patterns across Europe, resulting in a limited number of "party families" [19](#page=19). #### 3.3.1 Cleavages arising from state formation State formation, characterized by unification, standardization, and centralization, produced significant societal divisions [19](#page=19): * **Center-periphery cleavage:** This emerged from the process of cultural unification, which put pressure on local and regional identities, often manifesting as nationalism [19](#page=19). * **Church-state cleavage:** This arose from the curtailment of church authority, leading to conflicts over issues like education (the "schools struggle") and broader ethical conflicts. Christian democracy is a political force often associated with this cleavage [19](#page=19). #### 3.3.2 Cleavages arising from the Industrial Revolution The Industrial Revolution, starting in the late 18th century, profoundly impacted society, initially without extensive regulation. This led to [19](#page=19): * **Labor-capital cleavage:** This cleavage centers on socio-economic rights and the tension between freedom of enterprise and the rights of labor. Liberalism and socialism are ideologies deeply rooted in this divide [19](#page=19). * **Urban-rural cleavage:** The declining economic and political significance of rural areas relative to cities created divisions. Conservatism is often associated with this cleavage, alongside phenomena like farmers' parties [19](#page=19). ### 3.4 Major political ideologies #### 3.4.1 Liberalism Liberalism champions individual freedom, based on a positive view of human rationality and optimism about progress and human malleability [20](#page=20). * **Key Thinker:** John Locke (1632-1704) emphasized freedom as the cornerstone, advocating for social contracts, consent of the governed, and limited government power. He also promoted anti-paternalism, asserting the right to choose one's own good life [20](#page=20). * **Types of Liberalism:** * **Philosophical Liberalism:** Encompasses political pluralism and religious tolerance [20](#page=20). * **Constitutional Liberalism:** Upholds the rule of law, fundamental rights, the separation of public and private spheres, and the separation of powers [20](#page=20). * **Economic Liberalism:** Advocates for free markets. Modern liberalism also acknowledges the need for socio-economic redistribution to ensure equal opportunities [20](#page=20). #### 3.4.2 Christian democracy Christian democracy, prominent in countries like Belgium, France, and the Netherlands, navigates a complex relationship with democracy, balancing a neutral state with Christian values [20](#page=20). * **Key Thinker/Document:** Leo XIII's 1891 encyclical *Rerum Novarum* laid the foundation for the social teaching of the church and influenced the development of Christian democratic and labor movements [20](#page=20). * **Core Principles:** * **Personalism:** Emphasizes restoring the values of the individual and societal engagement, linking freedom with responsibility [20](#page=20). * **Anti-etatism:** Advocates for a limited government that provides necessary conditions for individual and community development [21](#page=21). * **Anti-economism:** Argues that the economy should serve humanity, often offering a critique of capitalism [21](#page=21). * **Subsidiarity:** Promotes decision-making at the lowest possible level [21](#page=21). * **Societal Engagement:** Highlights individual rights and responsibilities [21](#page=21). #### 3.4.3 Socialism Socialism prioritizes community and equality, based on a positive view of human nature that believes people can change by altering their circumstances. It emphasizes solidarity, cooperation, and socio-economic rights, viewing competition as dehumanizing [21](#page=21). * **Origins and Thinkers:** * **Marxism:** Envisions societal transformation through revolution [21](#page=21). * **Social Democracy:** Since the Godesberg Program it accepts capitalism but advocates for gradual economic reform and integration of workers through parliamentary decision-making [21](#page=21). * **Contemporary Pragmatism:** Focuses on defending the welfare state and social security, redistribution through taxation, and equal opportunities [21](#page=21). #### 3.4.4 Nationalism Nationalism is centered on the concept of the nation-state and the autonomy of the nation [21](#page=21). * **Key Thinkers:** * **Johann Gottfried Herder:** Focused on the "people's spirit" (*Volksgeist*) and the organic growth of a community bound by culture, asking "Who is the people?" [21](#page=21). * **Benedict Anderson:** Introduced the concept of the "imagined community" and critiqued the notion of continuity with the past, emphasizing top-down state formation processes, notably aided by print capitalism [21](#page=21). #### 3.4.5 Conservatism Conservatism is a political ideology that emphasizes tradition, established institutions, and gradual change (#page=19, 20). While the provided text doesn't detail its core tenets extensively in this section, it is linked to the urban-rural cleavage [19](#page=19) [20](#page=20). ### 3.5 New cleavage theories #### 3.5.1 The "Freezing Hypothesis" This hypothesis suggests that cleavages became "frozen" with the introduction of universal suffrage, leading to a stable party landscape. However, it faces limitations [21](#page=21): * **Limited Generalizability:** Primarily focuses on Europe [22](#page=22). * **Limited Predictive Power:** Struggles to predict future political developments [22](#page=22). * **Neglect of Agency:** Fails to account for the role of political actors and the politicization of new issues [22](#page=22). #### 3.5.2 The "Silent Revolution" Ronald Inglehart's "Silent Revolution" theory, emerging from the 1990s, observed shifts in political preferences and attitudes [22](#page=22). * **Observations:** State protests in the 1960s-70s, criticism of traditional parties, and the spread of new ideas [22](#page=22). * **Hypothesis:** A revolution in value patterns, political attitudes, and voting preferences, driven by increasing post-WWII prosperity. The formative years are crucial for attitude development, leading to a generation gap in political attitudes and voting behavior [22](#page=22). * **Underlying Model:** Based on a psychological model of need satisfaction: material needs must be met before post-material needs emerge, particularly among younger generations [22](#page=22). #### 3.5.3 Emerging cleavages and theories New societal divisions and theoretical frameworks have emerged, addressing limitations in earlier models: * **Feminism:** Critiques patriarchy, focusing on the distinction between sex and gender [22](#page=22). * **Types:** * **Liberal Feminism:** (19th century) Emphasizes equal rights and critiques "false universalism" [22](#page=22). * **Radical Feminism:** (1960s) Focuses on gender and the idea that "the personal is political," arguing that civilization constructs femininity [22](#page=22). * **Intersectionality (Kruispunt denken):** (1990s, Kimberle Crenshaw) Highlights the interaction of power systems, emphasizing that these interactions are not mere additions [23](#page=23). * **Multiculturalism:** Involves both descriptive and normative dimensions, emphasizing socio-cultural recognition and group rights. This includes rights for ethno-cultural communities, self-governance, and representation rights, but also faces contestation and problematizes decolonization and persistent unequal power relations [23](#page=23). * **Ecologism:** Centers on the ecosystem, critiques anthropocentrism, and promotes holism and ecocentrism. It advocates for animal rights (Peter Singer), rights of nature, and economic models focused on sustainable development [23](#page=23). #### 3.5.4 New cleavage theories (post-Inglehart) While Inglehart's theory is influential, new hypotheses have been proposed to explain contemporary political dynamics: * **"Silent Counter-Revolution" (Piero Ignazi, 2003):** Suggests a transition in post-industrial societies beyond just post-modernism, leading to more liberalism and conservatism [23](#page=23). * **"Winners vs. Losers of Globalization" (Hanspeter Kriesi, 2006):** Examines the unequal impacts of de-nationalization and globalization [23](#page=23). * **Globalization Processes:** Erosion of state borders, transnational crises, and limited state capacity to address them [23](#page=23). * **Unequal Impacts:** Affects identity preservation, job security (due to delocalization), and the affordability of the welfare state [23](#page=23). * **Right-wing Populism:** Exploits these concerns by advocating for border closures, defending Western values, and expressing Euroscepticism [24](#page=24). #### 3.5.5 Extreme Right-Wing Populism and Fascism * **Extreme Right-Wing Populism:** Characterized by extreme nationalism, conservative authoritarianism (emphasizing tradition, order, rights, and duties), anti-establishment rhetoric (pure people vs. corrupt elite), and a populist appeal to the highest authority of the people, often with an exclusive vision of "the people" and symbols reminiscent of fascism [24](#page=24). * **Fascism (1920-1930):** A historically and geographically limited phenomenon, often appearing in countries struggling with democratic transitions. It is characterized by anti-enlightenment and anti-intellectual thought, anti-individualism (subordinating the individual to the state), corporatism (disciplining the workforce), and a racial component. This represents a "democratic norm transgression" [24](#page=24). ### 3.6 Conclusion on new cleavages Cleavage theories, while potentially simplifying reality, are invaluable for understanding the emergence of new political parties and movements. A cleavage represents a deep and enduring societal opposition. Ideologies play a crucial role in shaping collective identity awareness, while political parties articulate and mobilize these identities systematically. The future development of these divisions into significant cleavages will depend on factors like the electoral system and the organization of political competition [24](#page=24) [25](#page=25). --- # Democracy, representation, and participation This topic explores the multifaceted concept of democracy, delving into its definitions, characteristics, and various dimensions, with a particular focus on liberal democracy, alongside an examination of political representation, democratic participation, social movements, interest groups, and political culture. ### 4.1 What is democracy? Democracy, derived from the Greek "demos" (people) and "kratos" (rule), signifies "rule by the people". It is an often contested concept, existing as both an ideal and a practical reality. Evaluating democracy can be approached from either a procedural or an outcome-oriented perspective [26](#page=26). #### 4.1.1 Definition and characteristics Democracy can be applied to various forms of political steering and is fundamentally a method of collective decision-making. Its core characteristics include a degree of equality among participants and the involvement of citizens during essential phases of decision-making [26](#page=26). * **Descriptive definition:** This definition simply describes democracy without making judgments about its necessity or relevance [26](#page=26). * **Broad definition:** This definition is applicable to many different communities [26](#page=26). * **Core elements:** * **Collective decision-making:** Decisions are made by and for a group, binding all its members [26](#page=26). * **Equality:** This is crucial for democratic self-governance, though the degree of equality can vary [26](#page=26). * **Variance:** Equality may be more or less pronounced and can be limited to specific phases of decision-making [26](#page=26). #### 4.1.2 Liberal democracy Liberal democracy is characterized by three key dimensions: 1. **Power rests on the population:** This is a core idea, historically considered a minimal condition for democracy. It encompasses **popular sovereignty**, as conceptualized by Rousseau and participation in decision-making through voting and the right to be elected. It also requires a choice among alternatives [26](#page=26). 2. **Rule of law (rechtsstaat):** This dimension ensures that the execution of state power is governed by fixed rules and procedures for the removal and succession of officeholders [26](#page=26). 3. **Individual rights and freedoms:** This includes political rights and freedoms, such as human rights, the right to life, and the right to a fair trial. In a liberal democracy, state interests do not take precedence over individual rights [26](#page=26). The rule of law and individual rights/freedoms are considered minimal prerequisites for liberal democracy [26](#page=26). #### 4.1.3 Hybrid systems and authoritarianism Fareed Zakaria described hybrid systems as a combination of democracy and authoritarianism, featuring democratic basic structures and competitive elections alongside highly personalized leadership, concentration of power, weak opposition, undermined competitiveness, and curtailed political freedoms. Authoritarianism, conversely, is marked by significant centralization of power, limited political freedoms, minimal pluralism, and sometimes elections that are not fair or democratic, involving manipulation, intimidation, fraud, or a lack of competition, and no genuine opposition [27](#page=27). #### 4.1.4 Measuring democracy The Freedom House index is one method used to measure democracy. It assesses countries based on political rights (electoral process, political pluralism, functioning government) and basic rights (freedom of speech and belief, freedom of association, legal system, personal autonomy, and individual rights) [27](#page=27). #### 4.1.5 Arguments for and against democracy **Arguments for democracy:** * **Moral/Principle-based reasons:** * It is considered the best safeguard for individual rights and freedoms. John Stuart Mill argued that open debate prevents dogmas [27](#page=27). * Democracies tend to maintain peaceful relations with each other, a concept known as the "democratic peace" theorized by Immanuel Kant [27](#page=27). * **Instrumental reasons:** * **Increased responsiveness:** Democracies are more responsive to the needs of the populace, potentially leading to greater economic growth. Amartya Sen and Jean Drèze highlighted that competition between parties and free/fair elections ensure politicians heed the needs of the most vulnerable and that better communication flows facilitate this [27](#page=27). * **Improved decision-making:** A larger number of people involved increases the chance of a correct assessment of problems, as suggested by De Condorcet's "law of large numbers" in the 18th century. The diversity of profiles and backgrounds can also compensate for biases among politicians [27](#page=27). **Arguments against democracy:** * **Democratic competence of the people:** There is a risk of manipulation and a lack of democratic mindset among citizens, which can be addressed through citizenship education and by mitigating the effects of social media and confirmation bias [28](#page=28). * **Boundary problem:** Defining "the people" is inherently non-democratic, raising questions about who belongs to the people and how this is democratically determined. The concepts of "all affected" (everyone impacted by decisions should have a say) and "all subjected" (only those bound by obligations should have a say) highlight this challenge [28](#page=28). ### 4.2 Political representation Political representation involves "making present" or standing for someone else. The term "re-praesentare" implies representation necessitates a relationship and a link between the representation and the reality it represents, akin to René Magritte's "La Trahison des Images". This concept is often understood through a **principal-agent relationship**, where elections structure this dynamic, creating expectations of electoral authorization and accountability, leading to responsiveness. Responsiveness signifies that the will of the people is made present through the actions of their representatives [28](#page=28). #### 4.2.1 Direct and representative democracy * **Direct democracy:** Citizens decide directly through popular assemblies. Contemporary elements include referenda and town hall meetings. The Athenian democracy is cited as an example [28](#page=28). * **Advantages:** No distortion of the people's will; aligns with educated and assertive citizens [28](#page=28). * **Disadvantages:** Scalability issues; inequalities in participation; no correction against fleeting opinions or emotional mobilization [28](#page=28). * **Representative democracy:** Citizens decide indirectly through elections, choosing representatives to make decisions on their behalf [28](#page=28). * **Advantages:** Representation mobilizes; introduces a distance that promotes flexibility and acknowledges the need for deliberation and compromise, aiming for the general interest rather than a singular "people's will" [29](#page=29). * **Disadvantages:** Creates a distance between the governed and governors; promotes little political participation [29](#page=29). #### 4.2.2 Forms of representation Representation can take several forms, primarily differing on the basis of what guides politicians' decisions: * **Mandate vs. Independence:** * **Delegation (delegate):** Politicians act as a mouthpiece, strictly following specific instructions from their principals (voters). This implies a degree of distrust in representatives and assumes voters have clear preferences, limiting the representative's autonomy [29](#page=29). * **Trust (trustee):** Politicians are given a broad, less defined mandate and enjoy the trust of their principals to exercise their own judgment. This recognizes that voters may lack the necessary knowledge or preferences [29](#page=29). * **Party mandate (responsive party model):** The representative's role is shaped by the party program, which guarantees that voters do not place blind trust in an individual agent. This model combines autonomy with a mandate and requires party loyalty. It functions best in a two-party system where voters identify with the entire party program [29](#page=29). * **Nation vs. Special Interest:** This concerns who is to be represented. * **Territorial component:** Representatives are elected within specific electoral districts [29](#page=29). * **Party-ideological structure:** Representatives are guided by an ideological vision of the general interest, serving specific groups [29](#page=29). * **Representation as a reflection:** The question arises whether it matters *who* our representatives are. * **Substantive representation:** Focuses on the "politics of ideas" and the representation of interests [29](#page=29). * **Descriptive representation:** Focuses on the "politics of presence" and pays attention to the social position from which one speaks. The argument here is that shared experiences improve the quality of substantive representation. This perspective advocates for parliaments to mirror the socio-demographic reality, sometimes through quotas or reserved seats, as proposed by Anne Phillips [29](#page=29). #### 4.2.3 Arguments for descriptive representation (Anne Phillips, 1995) 1. Diversity of perspectives enhances decision-making quality [30](#page=30). 2. It can correct historical injustices [30](#page=30). 3. It leads to better advocacy for specific interests [30](#page=30). 4. It serves as a role model and promotes emancipation [30](#page=30). **Arguments against:** * The "slippery slope" argument: For which groups should representation be reserved and for which not? [30](#page=30). **Findings regarding descriptive representation:** * A relationship exists between descriptive representation (DR) and substantive representation (SR), though it is not deterministic [30](#page=30). * The role model effect can lead to women participating in competitive elections, positively impacting political knowledge [30](#page=30). * The "burden of representation" can lead to increased expectations of representatives [30](#page=30). #### 4.2.4 Waves of democratization Samuel Huntington identified three waves of democratization : 1. **First wave (1826–1930):** Primarily in Western Europe and North Africa, characterized by the introduction or expansion of suffrage [30](#page=30). 2. **Second wave (Post-WWII–1970s):** Driven by decolonization and the defeat of fascism [30](#page=30). 3. **Third wave (1974–present):** Occurred in Spain, Asia, Africa, and globally, including the democratization of Spain and Portugal, the end of apartheid in South Africa, and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Each wave saw an increase in the number of democratic countries [30](#page=30). #### 4.2.5 Democracy in danger: Backsliding and deficit * **Backsliding:** This refers to the erosion of democratic institutions and practices, including the restriction of social contact, making voter registration difficult, limiting open and free political competition (including opposition), and undermining the rule of law by curtailing judicial independence or refusing to adhere to international legal standards. It also involves the restriction of individual and political freedoms, particularly in times of crisis [30](#page=30). * **Deficit:** This refers to a decline in democratic health as evidenced by: * **Attitudes:** Low political trust and potentially declining support for the democratic model [31](#page=31). * **Behavior:** Decreasing voter turnout, increasing electoral volatility, declining party membership and identification, loss of votes for traditional parties, and a general decline in trust in politics [31](#page=31). Despite these challenges, representative democracies continue to function, and the ideal of democracy remains highly valued [31](#page=31). ### 4.3 Political participation #### 4.3.1 Definition of political participation Political participation encompasses all ways citizens signal their preferences and demands to political decision-makers and exert pressure to ensure these demands and preferences are met [31](#page=31). * **Components:** * Providing information [31](#page=31). * Exerting political pressure [31](#page=31). #### 4.3.2 Forms of action * **Conventional action:** Organized by the government or political elite [31](#page=31). * **Non-conventional action:** Organized by participants themselves, relying on their own resources [31](#page=31). * **New forms of action:** Including social media and consumer choices [31](#page=31). #### 4.3.3 Patterns in political participation 1. Most people are not politically active [32](#page=32). 2. Participation is unequal. Reasons for non-participation include: * **Cannot:** Lack of knowledge or skills [32](#page=32). * **Will not:** Lack of interest or a feeling of powerlessness [32](#page=32). * **Are not asked:** Lack of connections to networks and organizations [32](#page=32). 3. There is a decline in conventional participation, with traditional parties losing members who are also less active. Voter turnout has also decreased [31](#page=31). 4. There is a shift towards non-conventional forms of participation, particularly among younger people. However, it remains to be seen if these methods are sufficient for their demands and preferences to be heard [32](#page=32). ### 4.4 Pressure groups and social movements Both pressure groups (PGs) and social movements (SMs) serve as intermediaries between society and politics, forming part of the societal middle ground. They aim to influence government policy and actions, utilize various action tools, and do not participate directly in elections. Their influence is often context-dependent [32](#page=32). * **Differences:** * **Social movements:** Have broader objectives, looser and less formal organizational structures, and often employ protest and non-conventional means [32](#page=32). * **Pressure groups:** Utilize direct action methods, such as lobbying [32](#page=32). #### 4.4.1 Functioning and influence The functioning of PGs and SMs can be analyzed through the lens of **pluralism versus corporatism**. Their influence has evolved over time, with concepts like social capital playing a role. Social capital, defined as networks of engagement, trust, and norms of reciprocity (often found in associational life), is linked to more stable, performant, and higher-quality democracies [32](#page=32). ### 4.5 Political culture Political culture is defined as the entirety of attitudes, political values, and behaviors concerning the political system. It is crucial for understanding political phenomena [32](#page=32). #### 4.5.1 Forms of political culture Studies, such as "The Civic Culture," have identified different forms: * **Parochial culture:** Citizens are largely unaware of or indifferent to the political system [33](#page=33). * **Subject culture:** Citizens perceive themselves as subjects within the system, aware of government actions but not actively participating [33](#page=33). * **Participant culture:** Citizens see themselves as active participants who can influence the system [33](#page=33). #### 4.5.2 The ideal of civic culture The ideal civic culture envisions a citizen who is both obedient to authority (respecting laws and trusting the political system) and actively engaged in politics [33](#page=33). **Criticism of the ideal civic culture:** * It is a Western ideal and its causal structure is debated [33](#page=33). * It undervalues the critical capacity of citizens [33](#page=33). * Modern citizens may be less obedient but more tolerant of civil disobedience, often participating through non-conventional channels. This raises questions about its impact on democratic stability. Political distrust is on the rise [33](#page=33). --- # Political parties, electoral systems, and government formation This segment delves into the intricate world of political parties, their historical trajectory, and classification, alongside an examination of electoral systems, voting behavior, parliamentary and governmental functions, and the critical process of government formation. ### 5.1 Political parties and party systems #### 5.1.1 The definition and historical evolution of political parties A political party is defined as an association or organization that participates in the election of political officeholders. Key characteristics include participation in elections, a relatively formal structure, and a broad focus on issues. Parties have evolved historically through distinct phases [33](#page=33): * **Kaderpartij (Cadre Party):** Emerging in the 19th century within parliaments, these were parties of notables or aristocrats, characterized by loose alliances of individuals with shared beliefs and minimal formal organization outside parliament [33](#page=33). * **Massapartij (Mass Party):** Developing in the early 20th century outside parliament, these are large, formally organized parties with significant mobilization potential, deeply embedded in society with strong ideological foundations [34](#page=34). * **Volkpartij or Catch-all Party:** Emerging mid-20th century due to economic prosperity and secularization, these parties aim to attract a broad range of voters, often with centralized leadership and a weaker ideological profile, distancing themselves from specific societal backgrounds [34](#page=34). * **Moderne kaderpartij or Kartelpartij (Modern Cadre or Cartel Party):** Emerging in the late 20th century, these parties act more as agents of the state, relying on state funding, focusing on governance rather than interest articulation, with a declining role for members and a professionalization of politics [34](#page=34). These shifts reflect societal and political changes such as the expansion of suffrage and the decline of societal cleavages (ontzuiling). The balance between the three "faces" of parties—the central party organization, the party in public office, and the party as a membership movement—has been redrawn, with the membership base declining while other aspects rise [34](#page=34). #### 5.1.2 Classification of political parties Parties can be classified based on several criteria: * **Organization:** * **Iron Law of Oligarchy:** Coined by Robert Michels in 1911, this theory posits that political parties, despite democratic intentions, tend to be controlled by a small elite (oligarchy). Leaders cling to power, and members rely on leaders for direction and expertise, making organization, hierarchy, and professionalization seemingly indispensable for democracy. While power concentration varies, there's a growing emphasis on internal party democracy in both new and established parties [34](#page=34). * **New Politics Parties:** These parties emphasize greater member input, such as direct election of party leaders or direct policy input, aiming to limit central leadership power [35](#page=35). * **Ideology (Party Families):** This classification groups parties across different countries with similar ideologies. Common families include: * Social Democrats (e.g., SPD, PvdA, PSOE, Labour) [35](#page=35). * Communists (e.g., PCF) [35](#page=35). * Greens (e.g., Ecolo, Les Verts) [35](#page=35). * Christian Democrats (e.g., CD&V, CDA, CDU, HDZ) [35](#page=35). * Liberals (e.g., VLD, MR, LibDem, VVD) [35](#page=35). * Conservatives (e.g., Partido Popular, Fianna Fail, PiS) [35](#page=35). * Agrarian Parties (e.g., Centre Party, BBB) [35](#page=35). * Populist Radical/Extreme Right (e.g., Vlaams Belang, RN, Fidesz, Sverigedemokraterna) [35](#page=35). * Regionalists (e.g., NVA, Scottish National Party, Sinn Fein) [35](#page=35). * One-Issue Parties (e.g., Pirate Party, Party for the Animals) [35](#page=35). * The left-right spectrum is often used but can be simplistic, as many parties incorporate elements of both. A two-dimensional model considering socio-economic and cultural progressive-conservative axes offers a more nuanced view [35](#page=35). * **Strategy:** Parties pursue three main objectives, often requiring trade-offs: * **Office-seeking:** Aiming to win political positions and executive power [36](#page=36). * **Policy-seeking:** Driven by a program to steer policy in a specific direction [36](#page=36). * **Vote-seeking:** Focused on winning and retaining voters [36](#page=36). #### 5.1.3 Party systems A party system refers to the relevant parties in a political system and their interrelationships, based on the number of parties, their size, and ideological distance. This system influences competition between parties. Key metrics for analysis include [36](#page=36): * **Effective Number of Parties:** This considers both the number of parties and their relative strengths, calculated as $N = 1 / \sum(p_i^2)$, where $p_i$ is the proportion of votes or seats for party $i$ [36](#page=36). * **Coalition Potential:** The likelihood a party is necessary for forming a coalition government [36](#page=36). * **Blackmail Potential:** The ability of a party to exert pressure on decision-making [36](#page=36). **Types of Party Systems:** * **One-Party System:** Typically only one party is allowed, with no competition, rendering it non-democratic (e.g., Soviet Union, Cuba) [36](#page=36). * **Dominant-Party System:** One party dominates for an extended period, though alternation of power is theoretically possible (e.g., Sweden 1945-1998, Hungary currently) [36](#page=36). * **Two-Party System:** Two major parties hold a significant majority of seats, with one usually able to govern alone, and alternation of power is common (e.g., Australia, USA, UK) [36](#page=36). * **Multiparty System:** Three or more relevant parties exist, often leading to coalition governments, with partial alternation of power (e.g., Argentina, Belgium, Netherlands) [36](#page=36). The "better" system is debated: two-party systems offer clearer voter choice and stable governments but can lead to abrupt policy shifts ("policy swings"). Multiparty systems foster compromise and continuity but can suffer from fragmentation, hindering government effectiveness and ideological clarity [37](#page=37). #### 5.1.4 Volatility in the party landscape Volatility measures the dynamism of the party landscape, encompassing: * **Electoral Volatility:** The extent to which voters change their voting behavior between elections [37](#page=37). * **Net Volatility:** The net shift in support between parties in each election [37](#page=37). * **Gross Volatility:** The total number of voters switching parties [37](#page=37). ### 5.2 Electoral systems and voting behavior #### 5.2.1 Democratic elections and their functions Democratic elections are a necessary but not sufficient condition for democracy. Essential conditions include free and fair processes, universal suffrage, secret ballots, impartial administration, and equal access to polling stations. Their functions are to link citizens to the political system, organize party competition, select political personnel, and gauge public will [38](#page=38). #### 5.2.2 Suffrage and voter turnout Universal suffrage grants all adult citizens the right to vote and be elected. Historically, suffrage expanded from census-based (until 1893) to multi-person voting (1893-1918), then to universal single votes for men and women. Compulsory voting exists in some systems but does not mandate voting itself [38](#page=38). Arguments for compulsory voting include civic duty, higher turnout, prevention of social inequalities in voting, and increased democratic legitimacy. Arguments against it cite limitations on freedom and the risk of "worthless" votes [38](#page=38). Voter turnout, or the proportion of eligible voters who participate, is declining and varies by country. Factors influencing turnout include compulsory voting, the presence of ideological cleavages, the perceived importance of an election, voter registration rules, civic norms, and a cost-benefit analysis by voters weighing costs (time, energy, barriers) against benefits (impact of vote, feeling of making a difference) [38](#page=38). #### 5.2.3 Classification of electoral systems Electoral systems are sets of rules and procedures for organizing elections, primarily concerned with how votes translate into seats. They can be classified based on [39](#page=39): * **Seat allocation per district:** Uninominal (one seat per district) or plurinominominal (multiple seats per district) [39](#page=39). * **Proportionality:** Whether seat distribution reflects vote share proportionally [39](#page=39). * **Support required for election:** Absolute majority (>50%), relative majority (most votes), or a specific quota [39](#page=39). **Major types of electoral systems:** * **Plurality (First Past the Post):** * **Characteristics:** Small districts, one seat per district (uninominal), candidate with the most votes (relative majority) wins [39](#page=39). * **Consequences:** Seat distribution is not proportional, favoring larger parties and often leading to a two-party system. Third parties struggle [39](#page=39). * **Examples:** UK House of Commons, US House of Representatives, Canada, India [39](#page=39). * **Plurinominal - Winner Takes All:** * **Characteristics:** Multiple seats per district, highest vote-getting list wins all seats in that district (via relative majority) [39](#page=39). * **Consequences:** Non-proportional seat distribution, disadvantageous for smaller parties [39](#page=39). * **Examples:** US Presidential elections [39](#page=39). * **Absolute Majority in Two Rounds:** * **Characteristics:** Uninominal districts, candidate/party with an absolute majority (>50%) wins. If no candidate achieves this in the first round, a second round is held, often between the top two candidates [39](#page=39). * **Examples:** France (parliamentary and presidential), Presidential elections in Brazil, Austria, Poland, Bolivia [39](#page=39). * **Proportional Representation (PR) Systems:** * **Characteristics:** Parties present lists of candidates in multi-member districts (plurinominal). Seats are divided proportionally to the votes received. A legal electoral threshold (e.g., 5% in Belgium and Germany, 4% in Austria, 10% in Turkey) often exists to prevent excessive fragmentation. Pre-electoral alliances (cartels) can help parties meet thresholds [40](#page=40). * **Consequences:** Leads to multiparty systems, coalition governments requiring compromise, and better representation of diverse ideas and identities. Can also lead to fragmentation and instability with many small parties. PR systems generally result in higher numbers of female elected officials due to higher party magnitude (seats per party per district) and the application of gender quotas [41](#page=41). * **Examples:** National federal elections in Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Latvia, South Africa [40](#page=40). #### 5.2.4 Candidate selection In majority systems, all candidates of winning parties are elected. In PR systems, the order of candidates on the list and preferential votes determine who is elected [40](#page=40). * **Closed Lists:** The pre-determined order on the list dictates the order of election [40](#page=40). * **Open Lists:** The number of preferential votes a candidate receives determines their order of election [40](#page=40). * **Belgium:** Federal/regional elections use a mix of closed and open lists, where list order and preferential votes matter. Candidates securing a certain number of preference votes are automatically elected, followed by list vote distribution. Local elections from 2024 onwards use open lists, with the candidate receiving the most preferential votes from the largest coalition faction becoming mayor [40](#page=40). #### 5.2.5 Consequences of electoral systems Electoral systems have significant consequences for: * **Party System:** Majority systems tend towards two-party systems, while proportional systems favor multiparty systems [40](#page=40). * **Government Formation:** Majority systems often result in single-party governments, allowing for clear implementation of manifestos. Proportional systems typically lead to coalition governments requiring compromise [41](#page=41). * **Representation:** PR systems are less detrimental to small parties, leading to a better reflection of diverse ideas and identities, though this can lead to fragmentation and instability [41](#page=41). * **Number of Female Elected Officials:** PR systems generally yield higher numbers of women elected due to higher party magnitude and the use of gender quotas [41](#page=41). > **Tip:** Every electoral system has its advantages and disadvantages, impacting the political landscape in profound ways. #### 5.2.6 Explaining voting behavior Voting behavior can be explained by: * **Structural Theories (Sociological Theories):** Group membership (class, religion, ethnicity) historically determined party choice and loyalty, with parties acting as representatives of specific group interests. However, parties are increasingly losing their traditional voter bases [41](#page=41). * **Attitudes and Emotions:** Individual attitudes, opinions, and values shape party choice, and emotions can influence voting decisions [41](#page=41). * **Rational-Choice Theories:** Voters make a rational calculation of their own interests based on available information. This includes strategic voting (voting to achieve a desired outcome, not necessarily for a preferred candidate) and issue voting (voting based on specific policy concerns) [41](#page=41). **Short-term factors influencing voting behavior include:** * **Candidates:** Media popularity and public image [41](#page=41). * **Campaigns:** Visibility and communication strategies [41](#page=41). * **Economic Factors:** Economic growth or decline [41](#page=41). * **Contingency:** Significant international or national events [41](#page=41). ### 5.3 Parliament and government #### 5.3.1 Separation of powers The concept of the separation of powers, notably articulated by Montesquieu in *De l'esprit des lois* aims to prevent the concentration and abuse of power by dividing it among three distinct branches: the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. The *trias politica* proposes that political power is exercised by three separate institutions: the government, parliament, and courts. However, these divisions are rarely absolute and can lead to inefficiencies [42](#page=42). #### 5.3.2 Parliamentary organization and functions Parliaments are political assemblies with legislative power, usually elected by the population [42](#page=42). * **Organization:** * **Factions (Fracties):** Parties organize within parliament, often adhering to strict party discipline [42](#page=42). * **Parliamentary Committees:** Thematic organizations that prepare legislation and scrutinize the executive branch [42](#page=42). * **Unicameralism vs. Bicameralism:** Parliaments can consist of one chamber (unicameral) or two chambers (bicameral). Strong bicameralism features two chambers with equal power (e.g., Argentina), while weak bicameralism sees one chamber constitutionally and politically subordinate to the other (e.g., Belgium, UK). Bicameralism can offer benefits like specialized labor and better representation but may lead to procedural slowness and inter-chamber conflict [43](#page=43). * **Functions:** * **Representation:** Parliaments represent the people, the nation, and their constituents, advocating for their interests. However, representation is not always perfectly reflective, and gerrymandering can distort it [43](#page=43). * **Legislative Function:** This involves initiating, amending, rejecting, and voting on legislation, which can originate from the government or parliamentarians. The process in Belgium involves submission and treatment in committee, followed by plenary session, and finally ratification and promulgation by the King [43](#page=43). * **Deliberative Function:** Parliament serves as a forum for open discussion on the governance of the country, seeking arguments and solutions for the common good. Opposition parties can use tactics like filibustering to delay votes [44](#page=44). * **Control Function:** Parliaments scrutinize the executive branch through mechanisms like written and oral questions. They can dismiss the government via motions of no confidence (parliamentary systems) or impeachment (presidential systems) and possess investigative powers through inquiry committees [44](#page=44). #### 5.3.3 Relationship between Parliament and Government Three systems illustrate the relationship between parliament and government: * **Parliamentary Systems (Westminster Model):** The government is not directly elected but chosen by and from parliament. Ministers are accountable to parliament, which can dismiss the government through a motion of no confidence [44](#page=44). * **Presidential Systems (USA Model):** Characterized by strong checks and balances, the president is directly elected and independent of the legislature. The president cannot be removed by congress except for serious offenses, and does not account to it [44](#page=44). * **Semi-Presidential Systems (French Model):** The president is directly elected and relatively autonomous from parliament. The president can dissolve parliament and call new elections. The prime minister heads the government and is accountable to parliament. Cohabitation is possible when the president and prime minister are from different political factions [44](#page=44). #### 5.3.4 Government formation * **Presidential System:** The directly elected president appoints ministers [45](#page=45). * **Parliamentary System:** Parliament decides on the formation of a new government [45](#page=45). * **Two-Party Systems:** Typically result in single-party governments [45](#page=45). * **Multiparty Systems:** Usually lead to coalition governments with two or more partners, striving for a majority government (at least 50% + 1 seat) [45](#page=45). **Types of Coalition Formation:** * **Minimal Winning:** A majority coalition without superfluous partners [45](#page=45). * **Minimal Number:** A majority coalition with the smallest possible number of partners [45](#page=45). * **Minimal Weight:** A majority coalition with the smallest possible majority [45](#page=45). * **Minimal Distance:** A majority coalition with the smallest ideological distance between partners [45](#page=45). **Other Government Forms:** * **Minority Government:** A government lacking a majority in parliament [45](#page=45). * **Oversized Coalition:** A coalition larger than a minimal one, with surplus partners [45](#page=45). * **Grand Coalition:** A coalition including nearly all major parties, regardless of ideology [45](#page=45). #### 5.3.5 Roles of Head of State and Government * **Head of State:** Typically a constitutional monarch or president, holding formal authority with symbolic importance and performing ceremonial duties. In Belgium, the Head of State plays a political role in federal government formation [45](#page=45). * **Head of Government:** The leader and spokesperson of the government, exercising the most significant executive power (e.g., Prime Minister, Chancellor). In presidential systems, the Head of State is also the Head of Government [45](#page=45). In Belgium's federal government, ministers and state secretaries are appointed, with equal distribution between language groups. The Prime Minister is distinct from the Head of State and party leader. The Council of Ministers comprises all ministers [45](#page=45). --- # Public administration and policy-making This section explores public administration and policy-making, focusing on policy as a dynamic process and the structures and relationships within governance. ### 6.1 Policy as a process: The policy cycle Policy is defined as a set of interrelated decisions made by governments with the aim of directing society in a particular direction. This output, or product, can be regulating, distributive, redistributive, or constitutive. The process through which these decisions are made is termed policy-making [46](#page=46). The policy cycle illustrates how policy is made and typically includes the following stages: #### 6.1.1 Agenda setting This stage involves the identification of problems and the transition of issues from the public to the policy or political agenda. It is a selection and reduction process, influenced by [46](#page=46): * **Cultural factors** [46](#page=46). * **Political and societal factors** [46](#page=46). * **Chance or unexpected events** [46](#page=46). Agenda setting can originate from both citizens, groups, social movements, and the media (bottom-up), who raise themes and try to convince the government to act. Alternatively, the government or politicians themselves can place themes on the agenda and mobilize citizens (top-down) [46](#page=46). #### 6.1.2 Policy preparation In this phase, solutions and policy options are developed by a limited number of actors. These actors often form "policy communities" and include civil servants, government officials, experts, academics, and, more recently, ordinary citizens through deliberative panels or mini-publics [46](#page=46). The process can be viewed through two lenses: * **Technically-rational:** This involves defining the policy problem, setting objectives, analyzing options, and selecting policy instruments using frameworks like the NATO model (Nodality, Authority, Treasure, Organization) [46](#page=46). * **Competitive process:** This acknowledges the struggle between different problem definitions and solutions, where actors employ framing to maximize support for their proposed solutions [47](#page=47). #### 6.1.3 Decision-making This stage involves making decisions on issues that are on the agenda and for which solutions have been formulated. Two primary models are often discussed [47](#page=47): * **Rational model:** This approach emphasizes cost-benefit analysis, aiming to select the policy option that yields the best results for the lowest cost. It assumes all information is available and processed, all effects are assessed, and decision-making is depoliticized. However, it is limited by "bounded rationality" [47](#page=47). * **Incremental model:** This model relies on trial and error, opting for feasible policy options. It assumes inadequate and incomplete information, a confusing and chaotic context, and that decision-makers are cautious, conservative, and risk-averse. This model is considered highly applicable to Belgium, particularly regarding decision-making and state reforms [47](#page=47). Decision-making is also influenced by: * **Institutional context and veto-players:** Rules, laws, and procedures play a crucial role [47](#page=47). * **Citizen participation:** This can occur through referenda, which offer clear instruments for simple yes/no questions and direct citizen involvement but can be blunt instruments for complex issues and susceptible to political elite influence [47](#page=47). #### 6.1.4 Policy execution This is the process by which decisions are translated into practice and correct actions. Two approaches exist [47](#page=47): * **Top-down:** The top decides, and lower levels execute, aiming for uniformity and control [47](#page=47). * **Bottom-up:** Street-level bureaucrats interact with the population, focusing on effective implementation and flexibility [47](#page=47). #### 6.1.5 Policy evaluation The effects of policies are evaluated. If objectives are met, the policy may be terminated. If objectives are not met, feedback loops and adjustments are initiated. Evaluation criteria can include efficiency, effectiveness, economy, process, and customer satisfaction. In practice, this stage is often limited [47](#page=47). > **Tip:** Understanding the policy cycle is crucial for analyzing how governmental decisions are made and implemented. Recognizing the different influences and models at each stage can provide a deeper insight into the complexity of policy-making. ### 6.2 Governance styles Different countries adopt distinct governance styles, broadly categorized as: #### 6.2.1 Consensus democracies These systems are characterized by: * **Proportional electoral systems** [48](#page=48). * **Multi-party systems** and broad coalition governments [48](#page=48). * **Corporatism**, federal governance and decentralization, bicameralism, rigid constitutions, and judicial review [48](#page=48). * **Significant power for intermediary bodies** in agenda-setting and policy preparation [48](#page=48). * A tendency towards **incremental decision-making** and **bottom-up implementation** [48](#page=48). * Examples include **Belgium** and the **Netherlands** [48](#page=48). #### 6.2.2 Majoritarian democracies These systems are defined by: * **Majoritarian electoral systems** [48](#page=48). * **Two-party systems** and single-party or minimal winning coalition governments [48](#page=48). * **Pluralism**, unitary governance and centralization, unicameralism, flexible constitutions, and no judicial review [48](#page=48). * **Centralized power** within politics [48](#page=48). * A tendency towards **rational decision-making** and **top-down implementation** [48](#page=48). * Examples include the **UK** and the **USA** [48](#page=48). ### 6.3 Functions and organization of administrations Administrations perform several key functions: * **Administering:** Bureaucrats implement and execute policies decided by politicians [48](#page=48). * **Advising:** Bureaucrats inform politicians, aiding them in their decision-making processes [48](#page=48). Administrations are organized in various forms, including: * **Bureaucracy (Max Weber):** Characterized by hierarchy, functionalism, legalism, neutrality, fixed employment, and expertism [48](#page=48). * **New Public Management (NPM):** Emphasizes market thinking, privatization of core tasks, management techniques (strategic and human resources management), and customer orientation [48](#page=48). ### 6.4 Politicians versus civil servants A fundamental distinction exists between politicians and civil servants: | Feature | Politicians | Civil Servants | | :------------------ | :----------------------------------------- | :---------------------------------------------- | | **Selection** | Elected | Appointed | | **Term** | Short-term | Long-term | | **Expertise** | Laypersons | Experts | | **Motivation** | Political (getting re-elected) | Professional (effective, efficient, economical) | | **Primary Orientation** | External (convincing citizens) | Internal (focused on the organization's operation) | | **Measure of Success** | Public opinion | Following rules | | **Number** | Few | Many | ### 6.5 Bureaucratic power Administrations, or bureaucracies, can wield significant power through various sources: * **Strategic position:** This includes access to knowledge and networks [49](#page=49). * **Logistical power:** Bureaucrats are often more numerous and permanent than political appointees [49](#page=49). * **Status:** They can be seen as a meritocratic elite [49](#page=49). This can lead to a "problem of ministerial control" [49](#page=49). #### 6.5.1 Controlling bureaucratic power Several mechanisms exist to control bureaucratic power: * **Political appointments:** Allowing for alternative leadership if a bureaucracy becomes too powerful [49](#page=49). * **Cabinets:** Employing political personal advisors to the government [49](#page=49). * **Ombudsfunction:** This role helps to limit administrative power [49](#page=49). The state itself, as a central organizational form, is defined by territory, sovereignty, and community. States are subject to various pressures, both internal and external and can adopt different forms based on the territorial distribution of power [49](#page=49). --- # State structures and federalism This section explores the different territorial organizations of states, focusing on unitary, confederal, and federal systems, their formation, the evolution of the Belgian state, and the dynamics of federalism. ### 7.1 Forms of territorial organization States can be organized territorially in several ways, with varying degrees of power and autonomy granted to their constituent sub-national units [49](#page=49). #### 7.1.1 Unitary states In a unitary state, territorial sub-divisions possess little to no independent powers. Any larger territorial units function as subordinate administrations rather than autonomous entities, with a single central point of administration retaining sovereignty. Examples include the Netherlands, Greece, and Ireland [50](#page=50). #### 7.1.2 Confederal states A confederal system is an association of national states that retain their autonomy. Sovereignty rests with the individual states, not with the union itself. Decisions within a confederation typically require unanimity, and each participating state preserves the right to withdraw from the union [50](#page=50). #### 7.1.3 Federal states Federal states are characterized by two autonomous and sovereign levels of government. A key feature of federalism is the presence and representation of constituent states in decision-making at the federal level, encompassing both "self-rule" (where sub-states can pursue their own policies without federal interference) and "shared rule" (where sub-states are necessary for federal decisions to be made). Examples include Australia, Belgium, and South Africa [50](#page=50). > **Tip:** The distinction between unitary and federal states is often viewed as a continuum rather than a strict dichotomy [50](#page=50). ### 7.2 How federations are formed Federations can emerge through two primary mechanisms [50](#page=50): * **Amalgamations:** This involves the coming together of existing states or political communities, as seen in the formation of the United States, Switzerland, and Germany [50](#page=50). * **Devolution:** This process describes the gradual decentralization of power within a formerly unitary state, leading to the creation of a federal structure. Examples include Belgium, the United Kingdom, and Spain [50](#page=50). ### 7.3 The Belgian state The Belgian state has evolved through a process of devolution, stemming from conflicts related to language, worldview, and socio-economic issues. This evolution has been marked by six state reforms aimed at providing political expression to societal differences and ensuring the coexistence of various groups [50](#page=50). #### 7.3.1 Evolution of Belgian state reforms * **1970-1989:** The initial reforms saw the establishment of three cultural communities and the foundation for three regions in 1970. In 1980, cultural communities were renamed "communities," each gaining a council and government with expanded powers, alongside the creation of Flemish and Walloon regions, also with their own councils and governments. The Brussels-Capital Region (BHG) was established in 1988-89, with its own council and government, and the powers of both communities and regions were further extended [50](#page=50) [51](#page=51). * **1993:** The fourth state reform, based on the Sint-Michiels Agreements, further expanded the powers of communities and regions. It introduced direct elections for regional parliaments and enshrined in the constitution that Belgium is a federal state composed of communities and regions [51](#page=51). * **2001:** The fifth state reform, known as the Lambermont/Lombarda accords, continued to broaden the competences of communities and regions. Changes were also made to Brussels, including a fixed number of seats for Flemish parties [51](#page=51). * **2012-2014:** The sixth state reform further expanded competences, reformed the financing of regions, and introduced fiscal autonomy for the regions. The Senate was also reformed to serve as a reflection chamber for the constituent states [51](#page=51). ### 7.4 Advantages and disadvantages of federalism Federalism offers several benefits but also presents certain challenges [51](#page=51). #### 7.4.1 Advantages * **Facilitates governance in large countries:** Sub-states are often closer to the citizenry, improving administrative reach [51](#page=51). * **Preserves regional identity:** It allows for the maintenance of distinct regional characteristics and cultures [51](#page=51). * **Manages deeply divided societies:** Federalism can be a mechanism for governing societies with significant internal divisions [51](#page=51). #### 7.4.2 Disadvantages * **Equality principle in stronger unions:** Can create tensions regarding fairness across constituent units [51](#page=51). * **Potential threat to national unity:** The emphasis on sub-state autonomy can sometimes challenge the cohesion of the nation-state [51](#page=51). * **Autonomy leads to new demands:** Granting autonomy often sparks further demands for more autonomy [51](#page=51). * **Complex decision-making:** The multi-layered governance structure can lead to more intricate and prolonged decision-making processes [51](#page=51). ### 7.5 Division of powers in federal states The distribution of powers in federal states is guided by several key principles [51](#page=51): * **Principle of subsidiarity:** Competences are allocated to the lowest possible level of governance [51](#page=51). * **Principle of division between levels:** Powers are divided according to policy domains, which can be: * **Exclusive:** A distinct set of competences is assigned to a specific level [51](#page=51). * **Overlapping:** Multiple levels share responsibility for certain policy areas [51](#page=51). * **Principle of division between sub-states:** This refers to the distribution of powers and degree of autonomy among the constituent states, which can be: * **Symmetrical:** All sub-states have the same competences or level of autonomy [51](#page=51). * **Asymmetrical:** Sub-states have differing competences and autonomy, as seen in the United Kingdom (Scotland) and Belgium (Brussels-Capital Region) [51](#page=51). ### 7.6 Conflict resolution in federal states Conflicts within federal systems can arise from various sources and are addressed through specific mechanisms and institutions [52](#page=52). #### 7.6.1 Central institutions * **Written constitution:** Provides the foundational framework for power distribution [52](#page=52). * **Second chamber (e.g., Senate):** Often designed to better represent the constituent states and act as a meeting point for them [52](#page=52). * In Belgium, specific majority rules, parity in the federal government, and the alarm bell procedure are employed. The Belgian Senate, though not directly elected, serves as an example of a chamber for constituent states. The German Bundesrat is another example [52](#page=52). #### 7.6.2 Consultative mechanisms (interest conflicts) These conflicts emerge when one government acts autonomously in a way that harms the interests of another. **Intergovernmental consultation** is crucial for resolving these disputes [52](#page=52). #### 7.6.3 Constitutional court (competence conflicts) Competence conflicts occur when an action by one government infringes upon the established division of powers. The constitution and a **constitutional arbiter** are vital for regulating these conflicts and interpreting the constitution [52](#page=52). #### 7.6.4 Redistribution (social/financial conflicts) These conflicts are managed by two principles: * **Principle of own responsibility:** Each level of government is responsible for its own policy choices and financing [52](#page=52). * **Principle of redistribution:** Financial resources are allocated to address greater social needs, creating a system of compensation. These **solidarity mechanisms** can themselves be a source of conflict [52](#page=52). ### 7.7 Role of local governments Local governments represent the smallest territorial units and typically have limited autonomy. They execute tasks that can be efficiently organized on a small scale and operate under the administrative supervision of higher authorities, possessing restricted financial capacity [52](#page=52). --- # International relations and the European Union This section explores the fundamental concepts of international relations, the historical development of global interactions, and the specific case of European integration and the European Union. ### 8.1 Understanding international relations International relations (IR) is the political-scientific study of relationships between states. While historically state-centric, globalization has led to increased attention to non-governmental actors like multinationals, banks, and NGOs. IR encompasses anything that impacts the governance of a political community beyond its borders [54](#page=54). #### 8.1.1 Historical roots of international relations Early human societies had limited contacts driven by regional and temporary interests. Ancient thinkers like Sun Tzu in China and Kautilya in India laid foundations for understanding statecraft, military strategy, and foreign policy, emphasizing national security and the pursuit of material advantage [52](#page=52). By the 16th and 17th centuries, contacts intensified, leading to the development of the notion of external sovereignty. This concept recognizes the mutual acknowledgement of territorial inviolability and the right of states to govern themselves autonomously. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 is a landmark event, implicitly recognizing the importance of internal and external sovereignty, the nation-state, and its national interests, thus laying the groundwork for international law. Jeremy Bentham introduced the term "international" in 1789, focusing on inter-state relations. World War II saw the specialization of political science, with the emergence of IR as a sub-discipline and the growth of international think tanks. The intensification of globalization in the 1990s brought concerns about neo-liberal international organizations, market capitalism, cultural exports, and the development of a standardized global culture. Conversely, it also presented opportunities for collective problem-solving and exerting pressure on countries [53](#page=53). #### 8.1.2 The concept of anarchy in international relations A central concept driving IR is **anarchy**, defined as the absence of a ruler or a legitimate world government. In an anarchic international system, international institutions derive their authority from the consent and compliance of states. The equal and independent sovereignty of states is paramount, and international treaties depend on national ratification [54](#page=54). > **Tip:** The absence of a central authority does not necessarily equate to chaos. The way states deal with potential violence and conflict differs significantly between national and international contexts. Kenneth Waltz, in his 1979 work *Theory of International Politics*, argued that the difference between national and international politics lies not in the use of force, but in the differing modes of organization to address it [55](#page=55). #### 8.1.3 Anarchy and international order Thomas Hobbes, in his 17th-century work *Leviathan*, described a pessimistic view of human nature and a "war of all against all" in the state of nature. At the national level, a social contract limits freedom in exchange for order and protection. Internationally, however, Hobbes saw anarchy and suggested that dominance and containment are antidotes to the state of nature, promoting stability by limiting the power of other states [55](#page=55). Hedley Bull, in *The Anarchical Society* explored order in world politics. He argued that while international anarchy exists, a "virtuous cycle" can emerge through repeated interactions between states, leading to predictable patterns of state practice and the development of an international community. International stability can be achieved through common practices and beliefs that increase the costs of non-compliance [55](#page=55). ### 8.2 Key theories in international relations Two dominant theoretical perspectives shape the understanding of international relations: idealism and realism. #### 8.2.1 Idealism The central argument of idealism is that states should and can act according to moral principles and legal norms. This perspective gained traction after World War I and II, influencing the formation of the League of Nations and the United Nations [55](#page=55) [56](#page=56). **Key tenets of Idealism:** * **Belief in an anarchic society:** Idealists believe in the possibility of an ordered international society. * **Positive and utilitarian view of human nature:** Emphasizes the capacity for compromise and reasonableness. * **Emphasis on horizontal relationships:** Focuses on cooperation between states to achieve relative advantages [56](#page=56). * **Informed by liberal thought:** Promotes principles of cooperation and mutual benefit. Historical figures like Thomas Aquinas, with his principles of a just war, and Immanuel Kant, with his theory of democratic peace, contributed to idealist thought. Kant argued that democracies are less likely to engage in war due to their respect for rules and the rule of law, and the power of public opinion. Free trade is also seen as a promoter of peace and understanding [56](#page=56). Woodrow Wilson's vision led to the establishment of the League of Nations. The UN Charter and its institutions, like the General Assembly and the Security Council, draw heavily on idealist principles [57](#page=57). **Characteristics of Idealism:** * Advocates for soft powers like economic sanctions [57](#page=57). * Supports humanitarian interventions based on the "just war" theory and international human rights declarations [57](#page=57). * Believes in the enforceability of human rights through international courts [57](#page=57). * Considers war morally reprehensible and conflict avoidable, driven by morality, soft powers, and the capacity for learning and identifying common interests [57](#page=57). * States are motivated by relative advantage (compared to the past) and mutual benefit, creating space for cooperation [57](#page=57). #### 8.2.2 Realism Realism posits that states should act according to their own national interests. This perspective is rooted in a belief in an international self-help system and is critical of the idealistic vision [57](#page=57). **Key tenets of Realism:** * **Belief in international self-help system:** States are primarily responsible for their own security. * **Pessimistic view of human nature:** Similar to Hobbes, realists see conflict as inherent. * **Emphasis on hierarchical and vertical relationships:** Focuses on power and dominance. * **Actions based on relative power:** States are distinguished by their power, leading to distinctions between small, medium, and great powers [58](#page=58). * **Historical roots:** Responds to the perceived failures of the League of Nations [58](#page=58). Key realist thinkers include Thucydides, whose account of the Melian dialogue highlights the power struggle between Athens and Sparta and the principle of "might makes right". Niccolò Machiavelli, in *Il Principe*, separated politics from morality, arguing that a good ruler possesses *virtù* (the ability to assess situations and achieve goals) and that the ends justify the means. Carl von Clausewitz viewed war as a tool to achieve national interests and security, rather than being morally constrained [58](#page=58). **Characteristics of Realism:** * States must act according to national self-interest [58](#page=58). * The international community is characterized by anarchy, making conflict inevitable [58](#page=58). * States are the dominant actors, acting rationally and unitarily based on their own interests and relative power [58](#page=58). * International stability is achieved through a balance of power or dominance, not equality [58](#page=58). * War can be a legitimate instrument to achieve this balance [58](#page=58). Realist practical implementation involves hard power, unilateralism, and a focus on national sovereignty, with a preference for inter-governmental cooperation over supranational institutions [59](#page=59). > **Tip:** Realism is often criticized for being too descriptive of the reality, but it has a normative character that can justify unilateral actions. #### 8.2.3 Idealism vs. Realism: A comparison The debate between idealism and realism can be understood through several key differences: 1. **Right to initiative in foreign policy:** Realism's emphasis on absolute national sovereignty promotes a unilateral view of international relations, while idealism's focus on peace and human rights promotes a multilateral view [59](#page=59). 2. **Decision-making methods:** Realism favors inter-governmental decision-making based on state sovereignty and consensus (with each state having a veto), often taking the form of treaties or alliances. Idealism favors supranational decision-making, where a higher authority can impose decisions on states, often through qualified majorities and potentially leading to international federations with shared sovereignty [60](#page=60). #### 8.2.4 The Prisoner's Dilemma The Prisoner's Dilemma is a thought experiment illustrating a paradox in decision-making where two individuals pursuing their own self-interest achieve suboptimal outcomes for themselves and the collective. It highlights the tension between individual and collective rationality. In this scenario, two arrested bank robbers have two options: cooperate (remain silent) and receive a milder sentence, or betray (testify against the other) and potentially go free while the other receives a harsher sentence [59](#page=59). Realists argue that the most likely outcome is mutual betrayal, as each individual rationally chooses to betray to avoid the worst-case scenario and control their own choice. This is used as an argument against demilitarization [59](#page=59). Idealist criticism of the Prisoner's Dilemma suggests it misrepresents the reality of international interactions by treating it as an isolated event without the possibility of communication or learning. Repeated interactions allow for the development of trust and the possibility of future cooperation [59](#page=59). ### 8.3 European integration and the European Union European integration is a complex process driven by a confluence of interests, historical contingencies, and the pursuit of deepening, broadening, and expanding the scope of cooperation. It involves a constant negotiation of national sovereignty [60](#page=60). #### 8.3.1 The historical context of European integration Following World War II, Europe was in ruins, and the political landscape was divided. The Marshall Plan, initiated by the US, aimed to rebuild European economies and secure them against Soviet influence, envisioning a united Europe as a condition for economic growth [60-61](#page=60, 61). Key motivations included excluding the USSR, preventing fragmentation, fostering US economic growth, and countering the Soviet threat [61](#page=61). Initial inter-governmental initiatives included: * **Organization for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC):** A think tank focused on economic cooperation, but its unanimity requirement hindered effective collaboration [61](#page=61). * **Council of Europe:** Established in 1948, it primarily focuses on human rights [61](#page=61). * **Western Union:** Formed by the UK, France, Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg for mutual defense, laying the groundwork for NATO [61](#page=61). #### 8.3.2 The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) The ECSC, established in 1951 through the Treaty of Paris, emerged from the failures of inter-governmental approaches, aiming for a "low politics" technical start. It involved supranational management of coal and steel, resources crucial for warfare, thereby fostering cooperation between France and Germany. The founding members were France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Italy. The ECSC featured a High Authority, a Council, a Parliamentary Assembly, and a Court of Justice [61](#page=61). #### 8.3.3 Deepening, widening, and expansion of the EU The process of integration has been characterized by "spillover," where integration in one sector leads to pressure for integration in others. Path dependency means that once a path of integration is chosen, it is difficult to reverse [61](#page=61). The **Treaty of Rome** in 1957 established the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) [61-62](#page=61, 62). The EEC aimed for a free trade zone without tariffs, guided by the "method-Beyen" for broad economic integration. It established a common market with four freedoms: free movement of goods, persons, services, and capital [62](#page=62) [65](#page=65). **Eurosclerosis** in the 1960s saw Charles de Gaulle champion inter-governmentalism over supranationalism, leading to a period of resistance and the "empty chair" policy. The **European Act** in 1986, spearheaded by Jacques Delors, aimed to create a single internal market by 1992, harmonizing legislation and removing tariff barriers [62](#page=62). The **Treaty of Maastricht** in 1992 established the European Union (EU), built upon the existing pillars of the ECSC, EEC, and Euratom, and added the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) [62](#page=62). Subsequent treaties like **Amsterdam ** and **Nice ** aimed to adapt the EU's functioning, though progress in CFSP and JHA was slow, and the enlargement process led to new conditions for membership. The **European Convention** proposed a constitutional treaty, which ultimately failed, leading to a period of reflection. The **Treaty of Lisbon** refined the EU's structure and decision-making processes [62](#page=62). #### 8.3.4 Enlargement of the EU Enlargement, the process of admitting new member states, is driven by the desire of candidate countries for prosperity and the existing members' pursuit of trade and power. The **Copenhagen criteria** set out the conditions for accession: democracy, a free-market economy, and the adoption of the *acquis communautaire* (all EU legislation). Later accessions included countries like Spain and Greece, and post-Cold War accessions saw neutral states like Finland, Austria, and Sweden join, as well as former Soviet bloc countries in 2004 with lower levels of development. Countries like Norway and Switzerland have chosen to remain outside the EU but participate in the European Economic Area (EEA) [63](#page=63). Current candidate countries include Turkey, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, and Ukraine [63](#page=63). #### 8.3.5 EU Institutions The EU operates through a complex institutional framework: * **European Council:** Composed of heads of state or government, it sets strategic direction and makes major political decisions on sensitive issues [63-64](#page=63, 64). * **European Commission:** A supranational body responsible for proposing legislation, representing the EU, and managing its budget. It is headed by a President and includes Commissioners, each with a specific portfolio [64](#page=64). * **Council of the European Union (Council):** Composed of national ministers, it acts as a co-legislator with the European Parliament. Decision-making can be by qualified majority (supranational) or unanimity (inter-governmental, especially for foreign policy) [64](#page=64). * **European Parliament:** Directly elected by EU citizens, it represents the people and acts as a co-legislator. It is composed of 720 members organized into political groups and sits in Strasbourg [64](#page=64). * **Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU):** Ensures the uniform interpretation and application of EU law across all member states. It comprises the Court and the General Court, with one judge per member state [64](#page=64). #### 8.3.6 EU Law and Policy-Making EU law is primarily based on treaties, such as the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). These treaties have been amended over time to reflect widening policy domains, deepening integration through the communautaire method, and democratization through increased power for the European Parliament [65](#page=65). Key legal instruments include: * **Regulations:** Directly applicable in all member states, having direct effect [65](#page=65). * **Directives:** Set objectives that member states must achieve, but leave the method of implementation to national authorities [65](#page=65). The **open coordination method** is used for sensitive policy areas where national sovereignty is a concern, relying on naming and shaming, scoreboards, and the exchange of best practices [65](#page=65). #### 8.3.7 EU Policies The EU has developed a wide range of policies: * **Internal Market:** Based on the four freedoms of movement (goods, services, workers, capital) [65](#page=65). * **Common Agricultural Policy (CAP):** Provides direct income support to farmers and includes market intervention measures, though it has faced criticism for over-subsidization (e.g., butter mountains) [65](#page=65). * **Social Policy:** Influenced by factors like free movement of workers, monetary union, and market liberalization, leading to the establishment of the European Social Fund (ESF) [65](#page=65). * **Environment and Climate Policy:** Includes initiatives like the European Green Deal and Fit-for-55, as well as emission trading systems and external actions like Amazon protection [66](#page=66). * **External Relations:** Encompasses enlargement policy, CFSP, and trade policy [66](#page=66). * **Structural Policy:** Aims to reduce regional disparities through funds like the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) [66](#page=66). #### 8.3.8 Political Science and the EU The EU is often described as *sui generis* (unique) and exceptional within political science. Various theoretical approaches are used to understand it, including [66](#page=66): * **Neofunctionalism:** Views integration as a process of spillover from low-politics areas [66](#page=66). * **Intergovernmentalism:** Emphasizes the role of national governments and their interests, with decision-making as a top priority for leaders [66](#page=66). * **Historical Institutionalism:** Highlights path dependency and how historical choices shape current institutions [66](#page=66). * **Multi-level Governance:** Views the EU as a political system with both state and non-state actors [66](#page=66). #### 8.3.9 Democratic deficit in the EU The concept of a "democratic deficit" in the EU refers to the perceived disconnect between citizens and EU-level decision-making. While citizens can directly elect members of the European Parliament, and indirectly influence decisions through national ministers in the Council, Euroskepticism exists, ranging from outright rejection of the EU project to criticism of its policies. Efforts to address this include promoting input democratization (e.g., Spitzenkandidaten process, citizens' initiatives) and enhancing throughput and output democracy for more effective governance [66](#page=66). In conclusion, the EU is an integral part of the political system, with integration being a continuous driving force [66](#page=66). --- ## Common mistakes to avoid - Review all topics thoroughly before exams - Pay attention to formulas and key definitions - Practice with examples provided in each section - Don't memorize without understanding the underlying concepts

| Term | Definition | |------|------------| | Politicologie (Political Science) | The systematic study of politics, aiming to understand political phenomena through scientific rules, including intellectual distance, systematic data collection and analysis, conscious technique selection, and openness. | | Politiek (Politics) | Everything related to the steering of a society, encompassing the management of collective affairs and the processes by which societal decisions are made and enforced. | | Polis | In ancient Greek context, it refers to a city-state, and more broadly, any form of cohabitation or community that requires collective steering. | | Politicizing | The act of making a theme or subject a matter of political steering, bringing it into the domain of public decision-making and governance. | | Depoliticizing | The process of removing the political character from something, often by presenting it as a technical or apolitical issue that does not require collective decision-making. | | Privaat (Private) | Domains where individuals can act and judge autonomously, and where collective intervention or steering is neither necessary nor desired. | | Publiek (Public) | Domains of social life where people encounter each other and where collective decisions must be made for the organization of that social interaction. | | Macht (Power) | The possibility of imposing oneself on others, even against potential resistance. It is a central concept in political science, essential for maintaining order and establishing rules. | | Gezag (Authority) | The exercise of power that is recognized as legitimate and is accepted in practice, leading to more sustainable power that requires less active exertion. | | Max Weber's Typology of Authority | Weber identified three ideal types of authority: traditional (based on custom and habit), charismatic (derived from the personality of the leader), and rational-legal (based on established rules and procedures). | | Robert Dahl's concept of Polyarchy | Dahl distinguished between democracy as an ideal type and polyarchy as its empirical practice. Polyarchy involves rule by the many, characterized by competitive elections, freedom of speech, access to information, freedom of association, and responsive and accountable government. | | Modellen (Models) | In political science, models are tools used to reduce empirical complexity and map relationships between processes, phenomena, or behaviors, similar to scale models or maps. | | Easton's Model (1965) | A systems model of politics that describes it as a continuous cycle of inputs (demands and support), gatekeepers (political decision-makers), outputs (policies and decisions), and feedback, influencing legitimacy. | | Theorieën (Theories) | Statements about relationships that can be verified or tested through hypotheses. In political science, theories describe probabilistic relationships rather than strict laws. | | Regels (Rules) | Formal (laws) and informal (norms, standards, agreements) guidelines that regulate behavior. Enforceable rules imply the use of power, regardless of their origin or perceived legitimacy. | | Trias Politica | The principle of the separation of powers, advocated by Montesquieu, dividing governmental authority into three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, to prevent the concentration of power. | | Staat (State) | A dominant form of contemporary political organization characterized by a fixed structure, sovereignty over a territory, a monopoly on violence, and international recognition. | | Staatsvorming (State Formation) | The process through which states emerge and consolidate power, often involving the concentration of power resources, legitimization, depersonalization of authority, and homogenization of culture, language, and law. | | Grondwet (Constitution) | A fundamental law that defines the state, outlines the structure and operation of its institutions (e.g., separation of powers), and guarantees individual rights and freedoms, serving as a bulwark against state arbitrariness. | | Legitimiteit van de staat (Legitimacy of the State) | The belief that the state's authority is justified and rightful. This can be based on various principles, including popular consent, tradition, charisma, or the rule of law. | | Contract Theorie (Contract Theory) | A philosophical approach suggesting that political authority arises from a social contract, where individuals voluntarily cede certain rights to a government in exchange for protection and order. | | Natuurtoestand (State of Nature) | A hypothetical condition before the establishment of organized society and government, often depicted as a state of freedom and equality, but also potentially characterized by conflict and insecurity (as in Hobbes) or by reason and cooperation (as in Locke and Rousseau). | | Leviathan | A concept developed by Thomas Hobbes, referring to an all-powerful sovereign authority that is necessary to prevent chaos and maintain order in society, arising from a social contract where individuals surrender their freedom for security. | | Volkssoevereiniteit (Popular Sovereignty) | The principle that the ultimate source of political authority resides in the people, who delegate their power to the government, which remains accountable to them. | | Breuklijnen (Cleavages) | Deep-seated divisions within a society that create distinct groups with differing value systems, leading to political mobilization and potential conflict. Examples include center-periphery, church-state, labor-capital, and urban-rural divides. | | Ideologieën (Ideologies) | Coherent sets of ideas that analyze society, offer a vision for a desired future, and propose a plan of action to transform the present into the ideal. They are based on specific views of human nature and society. | | Klassieke breuklijnenmodel (Classical Cleavage Model) | A historical model, notably by Lipset and Rokkan, that explains the formation of party systems based on common historical processes like state formation and the industrial revolution, leading to enduring cleavages. | | Liberalisme (Liberalism) | An ideology emphasizing individual liberty, rationality, and progress. Key tenets include freedom as the ultimate value, limited government, and often, support for free markets and individual rights. | | Christen democraten (Christian Democrats) | A political ideology that draws on Christian values, often emphasizing social justice, personalism, subsidiarity, and the role of community alongside individual rights. | | Socialisme (Socialism) | An ideology focused on collective well-being, equality, and solidarity. It advocates for social and economic rights, economic redistribution, and often a larger role for the state in providing welfare. | | Nationalisme (Nationalism) | An ideology centered on the nation-state, emphasizing national identity, autonomy, and self-determination, often rooted in shared culture and history. | | Conservatisme (Conservatism) | An ideology that generally emphasizes tradition, established institutions, and gradual change, often valuing order, stability, and individual responsibility within a social framework. | | Silent Revolution | A theory by Inglehart suggesting a shift in political preferences and attitudes, particularly in post-industrial societies, driven by increased affluence and a move towards post-materialist values. | | Feminisme (Feminism) | A range of social movements, political movements, and ideologies that aim to define, establish, and achieve the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes. | | Multiculturalisme (Multiculturalism) | A concept that acknowledges and promotes the recognition and integration of diverse cultural groups within a society, often involving discussions of group rights and recognition. | | Ecologisme (Environmentalism) | An ideology and social movement advocating for the protection and preservation of the natural environment, often criticizing anthropocentrism and promoting sustainable development. | | Democratie (Democracy) | A form of government where power ultimately rests with the people, typically exercised through elected representatives. It is characterized by principles of equality, participation, and individual rights. | | Polyarchie | A descriptive term for a system with substantial contestation and inclusiveness, often seen as the empirical manifestation of democracy. | | Rechtsstaat (Rule of Law) | A principle that governs the development and enforcement of laws, ensuring that all individuals and institutions are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced, and independently adjudicated. | | Autoritarisme (Authoritarianism) | A form of government characterized by strong central power and limited political freedoms. Individual freedoms are subordinate to the state, and there is little to no tolerance for political opposition. | | Politieke vertegenwoordiging (Political Representation) | The act of representing citizens or groups in the political process, where elected officials act on behalf of their constituents. | | Principal -agent relatie | A relationship where one party (the principal) delegates tasks to another party (the agent), who is expected to act in the principal's best interest. In politics, this often refers to the relationship between voters and elected representatives. | | Directe democratie (Direct Democracy) | A form of democracy in which citizens themselves directly participate in decision-making, rather than through elected representatives. | | Vertegenwoordigende democratie (Representative Democracy) | A form of democracy in which citizens elect officials to make decisions on their behalf. | | Mandaat vs Onafhankelijkheid (Mandate vs Independence) | Refers to the debate on whether representatives should strictly follow the explicit instructions of their constituents (mandate/delegation) or exercise their own judgment and discretion (independence/trustee). | | Golven van democratisering (Waves of Democratization) | Periods of widespread transition towards democracy, as described by Samuel Huntington, indicating a global trend in the spread of democratic governance. | | Politieke participatie (Political Participation) | All the activities citizens undertake to influence the political system, including voting, protesting, contacting officials, and engaging in political discussions. | | Pressiegroepen (Pressure Groups) | Organized groups that seek to influence public policy without seeking electoral office, often through lobbying and advocacy. | | Sociale bewegingen (Social Movements) | Collective, organized, and sustained challenges to existing power structures that are often based on shared values and social identities. | | Politieke cultuur (Political Culture) | The shared set of attitudes, values, and beliefs that people hold about politics and the political system, influencing political behavior and stability. | | Partijen (Parties) | Organizations that nominate candidates, contest elections, and seek to gain control of government power. | | Kaderpartij (Cadre Party) | An early form of political party, typically composed of elites and operating primarily within parliament, with a loose organization and limited membership. | | Massapartij (Mass Party) | A party that emerged in the early 20th century, characterized by a large membership, formal organization, and strong ideological commitment, aiming to mobilize broad segments of society. | | Volkspartij of Catch-all party (Catch-all Party) | A party that aims to attract voters from a broad range of social classes and backgrounds, often with a weaker ideological profile and a more centralized leadership. | | Moderne kaderpartij of Kartelpartij (Modern Cadre Party / Cartel Party) | A contemporary form of party that increasingly acts as an agent of the state, relying on state funding and focusing on governance rather than broad societal interests. | | Partijsystemen (Party Systems) | The set of relevant political parties in a political system and their interrelationships, often classified by the number and strength of parties. | | Kiessystemen (Electoral Systems) | The rules and procedures governing the organization of elections, determining how votes are translated into seats in parliament. | | Stemgedrag (Voting Behavior) | The patterns and factors influencing how individuals cast their votes, explained by structural theories, attitudinal factors, rational choice, and short-term influences. | | Scheiding der machten (Separation of Powers) | The division of governmental powers into legislative, executive, and judicial branches, designed to prevent the concentration of power and abuse. | | Parlement (Parliament) | A political assembly with legislative power, typically elected by the population, responsible for representing the people, making laws, and scrutinizing the executive. | | Regering (Government) | The body of individuals responsible for the executive functions of the state, often comprising ministers led by a prime minister or president. | | Wetgevende functie (Legislative Function) | The primary role of a parliament, which is to initiate, amend, and approve legislation. | | Controlefunctie (Control Function) | The parliamentary oversight of the executive branch, ensuring accountability through mechanisms like questions, debates, and motions of no confidence. | | Deliberatieve functie (Deliberative Function) | The role of parliament as a forum for public debate and discussion on matters of national importance, aiming to find solutions in the public interest. | | Presidentieel systeem (Presidential System) | A system of government where the president is both head of state and head of government, elected independently of the legislature, with a strong separation of powers. | | Parlementair systeem (Parliamentary System) | A system of government where the executive branch (government) derives its democratic legitimacy from and is held accountable to the legislature (parliament); the executive and legislative branches are thus interconnected. | | Semi-presidentieel systeem (Semi-Presidential System) | A hybrid system combining features of presidential and parliamentary systems, with a directly elected president and a prime minister responsible to the legislature. | | Beleid (Policy) | A set of interrelated decisions taken by governments with the aim of steering society in a particular direction. | | Beleidscyclus (Policy Cycle) | The stages involved in policy-making, typically including agenda setting, policy formulation, decision-making, policy implementation, and policy evaluation. | | Bestuursstijlen (Governance Styles) | Different approaches to governing, such as consensus democracies (emphasizing power-sharing and negotiation) and majoritarian democracies (emphasizing majority rule and decisive action). | | Administraties (Administrations) | The bureaucratic apparatus of the state, responsible for implementing policies and advising politicians. | | Bureaucratie (Bureaucracy) | A system of organization characterized by hierarchy, division of labor, formal rules, and impersonality, as described by Max Weber. | | New Public Management (NPM) | A management approach that applies private sector techniques to public administration, emphasizing market principles, efficiency, and customer orientation. | | Ambtenaren (Civil Servants) | Officials appointed to administrative positions within the state bureaucracy, characterized by expertise and a focus on professional duty. | | Bureaucratische macht (Bureaucratic Power) | The influence and authority wielded by administrative bodies and officials, stemming from their strategic position, knowledge, and permanence. | | Staat onder druk (State Under Pressure) | The challenges and stresses faced by the state in contemporary times, due to internal and external factors impacting its sovereignty and functions. | | Unitaire staat (Unitary State) | A state where the central government holds most of the power, and subnational units have little or no autonomy. | | Confederale staat (Confederal State) | An association of sovereign states that delegate certain powers to a central government but retain their ultimate autonomy. | | Federale staat (Federal State) | A political system where power is divided between a central (federal) government and regional (state) governments, with both levels having autonomous authority in their respective spheres. | | Subsidiariteit (Subsidiarity) | The principle that decisions should be made at the lowest feasible level of government, closest to the citizens. | | Internationale betrekkingen (International Relations) | The study of the relationships and interactions between states and other international actors in the global arena. | | Vrede van Westfalen (Peace of Westphalia) | A series of peace treaties signed in 1648 that ended the Thirty Years' War and the Eighty Years' War, establishing principles of state sovereignty and non-interference. | | Globalisering (Globalization) | The increasing interconnectedness of the world's economies, cultures, and populations, brought about by cross-border trade in goods and services, technology, and flows of investment, people, and information. | | Anarchie (Anarchy) | In international relations, the absence of a higher governmental authority above states, leading to a self-help system where states must rely on their own resources for security. | | Idealisme (Idealism) | A theory in international relations that emphasizes the importance of moral principles, international law, and cooperation among states to achieve peace and justice. | | Realisme (Realism) | A theory in international relations that views states as the primary actors, driven by national self-interest and the pursuit of power in an anarchic international system. | | Machtsevenwicht (Balance of Power) | A concept in realism suggesting that international stability is maintained when no single state is powerful enough to dominate others, leading to alliances and counter-alliances. | | Prisoners Dilemma | A game theory scenario illustrating how two rational individuals might not cooperate, even if it appears that it is in their best interest to do so, leading to a suboptimal outcome for both. | | Europese Unie (European Union) | A political and economic union of 27 European countries that operate as a single market and have a common policy on trade, agriculture, and regional development. | | Supranationalisme (Supranationalism) | A form of international cooperation where member states delegate significant authority to a higher, supranational body. | | Intergouvernementalisme (Intergovernmentalism) | A form of international cooperation where states retain their sovereignty and decisions are made through negotiation and consensus among national governments. | | Europese integratie (European Integration) | The process by which European countries have become increasingly interconnected politically and economically, leading to the establishment of the European Union. | | Wetgeving (Legislation) | The process of creating and enacting laws. In the EU context, this involves regulations, directives, and other legal acts. | | Verordening (Regulation) | A legally binding EU act that must be applied in its entirety across all member states. | | Richtlijn (Directive) | An EU act that sets out a goal that all EU countries must achieve. However, it is up to the individual countries to devise their own laws on how to reach these goals. | | Europese Commissie (European Commission) | The executive arm of the EU, responsible for proposing legislation, implementing EU policies, and enforcing EU law. | | Raad van de Europese Unie (Council of the European Union) | Represents the governments of the EU member states, where ministers from each country meet to discuss, amend, and adopt laws and coordinate policies. | | Europees Parlement (European Parliament) | The directly elected legislative body of the EU, sharing legislative and budgetary power with the Council of the European Union. | | Hof van Justitie van de Europese Unie (Court of Justice of the European Union) | Ensures that EU law is interpreted and applied the same way in every member country; guarantees that countries and EU institutions abide by EU law. | | Democratische deficit (Democratic Deficit) | A criticism of the EU suggesting a perceived lack of direct democratic accountability and citizen participation in its decision-making processes. |