COMPARATIVE POLITICS COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION

AUGUST 2001

Students taking the comp as a major have six hours to answer one question from Part h one question from Part II, and two questions from Part III. Students taking the comp as a minor have four and one-half hours to answer one question from Part I and EITHER one question from Pan II and one question from Part III OR two questions from Part III.

Part I. General Theory
A. Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but tinder circumstances directly found, given, and transmitted from the past. (Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte).

Discuss Marx's theory of structure and agency and its relevance for the contemporary study of comparative politics. In what ways does his theory inform rational choice, sttucturalist, and culturalist approaches to the relationship of structure and agency? Provide specific references to major theoretical statements in your answer.

B. Barbara Geddes has argued that rational choice makes "theory building possible" while other approaches to comparative politics have at best produced "ad hoc inductive generalizations." Mare Ross contends, however, that interests "are contextually and intersubjectively defined. and the strategies used to pursue them are understood to be context-dependent." In this sense, interpretation trumps general theory. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of both rational choice and culturalist approaches to comparative politics. Make certain to specify in what ways, if any, the two approaches can make important contributions to theory and empirical analysis.

Part II. Methodology

A. Does a Lakatosian perspective on scientific progress support or discredit rational choice theory?

B. What precisely is the "small-n" problem? In light of your interpretation of this problem, discuss what role, if any, case studies have in the generation and testing of theories, and what procedures, if any, might be incorporated into case-study designs to resolve or ameliorate the small-n problem.

Part III Applied Theory

A. In his classic volume, Political Order m Changing Societies, Samuel Huntington argues that social mobilization leads to political instability and ineffective governance. In contrast, Robert Putnam, in his Making Democracy Work. contends that a mobilized civil society is crucial to effective governance m democratic societies. Assess the insights of each perspective considering Huntington. Putnam, and the work of others who support either of their arguments. Explain which argument you find most persuasive and discuss why. Is it possible to synthesize the different perspecuves?

B. The assumption of much political economy theorizing is that industrialization requires a strong and interventionist state. In an era of globalization and liberalization, however, it is widely believed that the capacity for such state action has been sharply curtailed. If true, what does this mean for the prospects of industrialization in the periphery? Does it mean that while developing countries can now stabilize and liberalize their economies in the short term, they cannot industrialize over the long term?

C. To what extent does recent theorizing about democratic transitions repeat the errors of modernization theory?

D. It has been claimed that electoral engineering has the potential to improve the degree to which politicians make policies that provide the greatest good for the greatest number. Critically assess this claim.

E. McAdams, McCarthy, and Zald write, "Mediating between opportunity, organization, and action are the shared meanings and definitions that people bring to their situations." They contend further that framing, or "the conscious, strategic efforts of groups of people to fashion shared understandings of the world and of themselves that legitimate and motivate collective action," is central to social movements. Assess the usefulness of the concept of framing to the study of social movements. What does it explain? What does it fail to explain? Give empirical examples. In your view, does the concept of framing have broader applications for the study of politics?