Background to European History from Renaissance to Modern Period

As Europe emerges from the Middle Ages, power the era of business, civil engineering and global research has begun and

will affect the lives of rich and poor for centuries, no
not only in Europe but also across the seas. Spanish and Portuguese conquerors and merchants expand their markets
Three routes laid the foundation for Europe's first transoceanic
empire. During the Italian Renaissance, which lasted from
Around 1330-1530, sociologists were rediscovering texts from ancient Greece and Rome. Renaissance artists and scholars celebrated the beauty of nature and human dignity, helping
shaping the intellectual and cultural history of the modern world. Also, at this time when almost all of Western Europe
Stuck in Roman Catholicism, oppression in the Church
led to calls for reform that would only die out when most of Europe was divided between Protestants and Catholics. Around the year 1540,
The Reformation had created a large section of Protestant support in central and northern Europe, as well as England and
part of France. Religious conflict and war will divide Europe
different, leading to changes in the Church and leaving permanent
religious division where there is always close to uniformity
belief in worship.

CODE: 33

AIRBORNE WORLD WAR 2 II HISTORY ENCYCLOPEDIA

  AIRBORNE 

Infantry and weapons delivered to a battlefi eld by parachute and glider. The Soviet Union was a pioneer in airborne warfare, experimenting as early as 1922 with both parachutists and gliders. It trained so many youths in sports jump and glider clubs of the  Komsomol  and  Osoaviakhim  that by 1940 over one million citizens had received some airborne training. The Red Army Air Force (VVS) also made advances in development of advance gliders and other specialized aircraft. This lead in airborne tactics and resources was squandered during the late 1930s purge of VVS top commands. An effort was made to reorganize in the late spring of 1941, but it came too late to affect the outcome of the opening battles of the German invasion of the Soviet Union in mid-1941. Preoccupied with defending against deep German penetrations during  BARBAROSSA,  the Red Army did not attempt strategic airborne operations. The Red Army and VVS had experimented with prototype fl ying tanks that were intended to accompany infantry into  deep battle  operations. That experiment stopped in early 1942 as more basic combat demands took priority in planning, production, and battlefi eld execution. Facing catastrophic manpower losses, the Red Army abandoned its prewar plans to form airborne tank, artillery, and infantry corps. Instead, it reorganized
15
Airborne
all  airborne forces on a brigade-level. The Stavka thereafter mostly used airborne troops as light or regular infantry in desperate ground fi ghting, with only small drops conducted near Kiev and Odessa. Surviving gliders were used to resupply pockets of regulars trapped behind German lines. In that respect, the German and Soviet airborne experience was similar. A  Soviet corps-level airborne operation was assayed during a Red Army counteroffensive at Viazma in February–March, 1942. It formed part of the  Rzhev-V iazma strategic operation  (  January 8–April 20, 1942). In the  Demiansk offensive operation  that spring, over 7,000 Soviet paratroopers died. They landed well enough behind  German lines, but were overpowered when left without suffi cient follow-on support. From 1942 the V VS employed its glider fl eet mainly to resupply  partisans  in German rear areas and to fl y in demolition specialists and explosives to assist partisans carrying out sabotage missions.  NKVD  men were also parachuted or glided behind German lines with instructions to establish tight central control over the partisans. Some Red Army airborne were employed in local attacks in the Crimea in 1943, during advances that retook part of the peninsula and surrounding Black Sea region. But most airborne were converted into  rifl e divisions  and thrown into hard fi ghting as regular infantry. Another large Soviet airborne operation was tried at Kanev on September 24, 1943. Having broken up the prewar airborne divisions, the Stavka deployed a scratch corps of ill-trained or even untrained recruits. Some were making their fi rst jump of any kind right into combat, over the Dnieper River at night. They were simply ordered into transport aircraft and told to jump. The operation failed with extremely heavy losses. The fi asco contributed directly to Soviet failure in the larger  Battle of the Dnieper (1943),  and Stalin forbade future night jumps. The most successful Soviet airborne assaults of the war came at its end, against the Japanese during the  Manchurian offensive operation  of August 1945. In that operation all three Red Army Fronts engaged against the Japanese employed airborne troops in, by then, well-practiced deep insertions.  German military observers in the Soviet Union in the 1920s were intrigued by Soviet airborne experiments, although senior offi cers in the Reichswehr were not. Germany built some secret airborne capability in the 1920s and speeded the program in the early 1930s. The Luftwaffe worked openly on an airborne capability from 1938, once Adolf Hitler backed the project. A full airborne corps was thus in place before the war, led by Luftwaffe General  Kurt Student.  Limited airborne operations were planned for the occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and again for the invasion of Poland in 1939. Neither plan was carried out due to settlement of the Czech crisis at the  Munich Conference  in September 1938 and the short duration of the  FALL WEISS  campaign in Poland. The corps eventually comprised one Luftwaffe division and a Heer division, seconded to the Luftwaffe. That was an unusual arrangement. In most militaries, airborne units were placed under army rather than air force control. The main aircraft employed in Luftwaffe airborne operations was the three-engine Ju-52. It could deliver  Fallschirmjäger  (paratroopers) directly or tow them in a small specialty glider. The DFS-230 “attack glider” carried 10 Fallschirmjäger or a 2,500 lb. payload of equipment. The Luftwaffe later built the huge Me-323 Gigant (“Giant”), which could carry 200 men. Typically in
Airborne
16
 late-war German weapons design, that super-glider was beyond Luftwaffe logistical and transport capabilities as it needed three other planes to tow it, and the German aircraft industry had by then gone over to nearly exclusive fi ghters production. The Me-323 thus made an equivalent contribution to the German war effort as did Howard Hughes’ infamous, giant “Spruce Goose” HK-1  fl ying boat  to Western Allied operations; that is, none whatever.  The fi rst ever use of airborne assault troops in combat took place in Denmark on April 9, 1940, when Student’s men seized key airports by surprise. Within hours Fallschirmjäger also landed across Norway. At  Dombås  near Trondheim, they were defeated by the Norwegian Army after fi ve days of fi ghting. At Narvik advance Fallschirmjäger engaged in extensive fi ghting with British forces that had landed amphibiously. At the outset of  FALL GELB  on May 10, 1940, Fallschirmjäger parachutist and glider-borne assaults achieved notable success in Belgium, where they landed near or atop several key forts. Their most spectacular success came with capture of the key fortress at  Eban Emael . In France, Fallschirmjäger took key bridges over the Meuse and other forward sites on the fi rst day, then awaited arrival of the Panzers. The most important element of their attacks was to mislead Western Allied commanders into believing the main weight of effort ( Schwerpunkt ) of the German offensive was in the north, when it actually came later through the Ardennes. Two more sets of landings were conducted on the fi rst day of the campaign in the Netherlands. One was carried out near The Hague, with the intention of seizing the airport to permit  airlanding  forces to fl y in. It met sharp resistance from the Dutch Army and saw huge losses of Ju-52 transports. A more successful operation led to seizure of key bridges over the Maas and several canals, allowing 9th Panzer to move quickly across country.  Fallschirmjäger carried out glider attacks in Greece during the  Balkan campaign  (1940–1941). There followed the largest German airborne action of the war: a large-scale attack against British and Commonwealth forces on  Crete  (Operation MERKUR). Parachute and glider-borne assaults quickly took the main airport, but Student’s exposed and lightly armed Fallschirmjäger took 25 percent casualties and had to be heavily reinforced before the island was secured from stunned and poorly deployed, but determined, British and Greek defenders. The casualty rate among Fallschirmjäger on Crete convinced Hitler to forbid further large airborne operations. Germany only used Fallschirmjäger and glider troops afterwards for special missions such as the rescue of Mussolini (September 12, 1943). It also used gliders in very small reinforcement or espionage insertions and to deliver supplies to isolated troops on the Eastern Front. Otherwise, the Fallschirmjäger of “3rd Parachute Army” were used after Crete exclusively as light infantry in support of regular ground forces. They fought on the ground in Italy in 1943; on the Eastern Front from November 1943 to May 1944; and in Normandy, Brittany, and across the Netherlands during the second half of 1944. On several occasions, such as in Normandy and the Netherlands, Fallschirmjäger faced equally elite Western Allied paratroopers who dropped on top of them and who were also trained to fi ght as light infantry. The Germans made a successful surprise airborne assault on  Tito ’s headquarters in western Bosnia in May 1944. The last signifi cant German use of
Airborne
17
glider troops was to land on the  Vercors  in southern France in an anti- Résistance  operation in mid-1944. No other Axis military in Europe used gliders.  Axis commanders also used the elite Italian airborne Folgore (“Lightning” )  Division mainly on the ground. It suffered massive casualties at  El Alamein  in 1942. The San Marco Marines of the Regia Marina also had a parachute unit, the Battaglione Nuotatori. Only the Japanese developed airborne capabilities among other Axis forces. These saw limited action from mid-1942 due to low numbers and because Japan quickly went over to a strict defensive posture around its Pacifi c perimeter. Before that, the Imperial Japanese Army drew upon German experience and advisers to train a limited number of men in parachute attack. Its “Raiding Group” (teishin dan) comprised 2 parachute regiments of 600 men each. They had organic transport and were complemented by an attached glider regiment. The Imperial Japanese Navy separately trained two battalions of  Rikusentai  from the Yokosuka base. These airborne marines were deployed on Celebes and Sumatra during the invasion of the Dutch East Indies in early 1942, and later on Timor. As Japan moved into a wholly defensive posture in 1943, the Yokosuka regiments were employed as airborne troops only in local raids and other small-scale special operations. They were largely wiped out fi ghting as regular light infantry in defense of  Saipan  in 1944.  The British responded to early German success by rapidly organizing their own airborne and airlanding units. The most basic early problem Britain faced was limited strategic options. From June 1940, Britain was especially strained—to the defensive limit, but not beyond—by Italy’s entry into the war and the consequent opening of new East African and Mediterranean fronts. Proposals to develop an offensive airborne capability initially met determined institutional opposition from RAF Bomber Command and from the British Army, which protested against releasing scarce aircraft and elite recruits to airborne training units. However, airborne operations fi t well the  Chiefs of Staff  strategy and the prime minister’s strong preference for peripheral assaults around the edges of the Nazi empire. Rather than division-scale drops in support of conventional ground forces, which were no longer engaged on the continent in any case, the fi rst British airborne operations were conceived as commando-style raids. The fi rst raid dropped British paratroopers into Italy in February 1941. Other small-scale raids saw drops into France, but the British also took a very different lesson from defending against the Fallschirmjäger assault on Crete than did the Germans after carrying out that operation. Where Hitler was most and adversely impressed by high Fallschirmjäger casualties, the British viewed Crete as a successful airborne assault that took an important military objective. From late 1941, therefore, British airborne capability preparation was elevated to division-level, and planning resumed for future large-scale operations.  Starting from scratch, the RAF and British Army had to design and produce specialist aircraft for airborne operations. The British did not have resources to spare at fi rst. Hence, they initially relied on an inadequate aircraft adaptation: drop holes were simply cut in the fl oor of two-engine Whitley medium bombers, then of two-engine Albemarle medium bombers. Once heavy bombers became available in large numbers, the British switched to four-engine Stirling and Halifax aircraft for their airborne deliveries. When American C-47 Dakotas became
Airborne
18
available through  Lend-Lease , the British switched to that highly capable and purpose-built airborne delivery aircraft. The C-47 was slow and unarmored, but it was a highly reliable transport for airborne troops heading to drops zones. And it allowed men to jump from a side door designed to accommodate fast drops with bulky equipment. British wooden glider types also evolved until, in combination, the Hotspur, Horsa, and Hamilcar far exceeded the lift capabilities of the small German DFS-230. Where the early Hotspur carried just 8 men, the Horsa carried 32. The still larger Hamilcar achieved a carrying capacity of 40 parachutists or seven tons of equipment, jeeps, or even a light tank. Over 4,000 of the two larger glider types were built. A powered version of the 40-seat Hamilcar was designed for the Pacifi c War but never went into action.  The fi rst effort to carry out a large-scale airborne assault out came with Operation  TORCH,  the Western Allied landings in North Africa in November 1942. British 1st Airborne Division next jumped into Sicily in 1943 during Operation  HUSKY,  fl ying from North African bases. British 1st Airborne was joined in the order of battle by 6th Airborne and dropped into hard fi ghting in Normandy at the outset of  OVERLORD  late on June 5, 1944, and into  D-Day (June 6, 1944).  British airborne jumped into total disaster around Arnhem during  MARKET GARDEN  that September. The experience shattered an entire airborne division and badly shook command confi dence in the practice of exposing paratroopers and lightly armed glider troops deep behind enemy lines. It should be noted that British airborne divisions were multinational. Dropping or airlanding alongside British troops in Normandy and again in the Netherlands were paratroopers of several nationalities, including a Polish Parachute Brigade and a battalion of Canadians with the  Red Devils  of 6th Airborne. Free French also served. The British also recruited a brigade of paratroopers from the  Indian Army  and another of  Gurkhas  from Nepal.  Chindit  glider airlandings were carried out in Burma with the aid of the U.S. Army Air Force in March 1944. The 50th Indian Parachute Brigade was used on the ground as light infantry, not as airborne, during the  Imphal campaign . The Gurkha airborne brigade dropped near Rangoon in May 1945.  The United States began development of a large-scale airborne capability in 1941. Until then its only operational airborne unit was the 501st Parachute Battalion. By the end of 1944 the U.S. Army trained and fi elded fi ve full airborne divisions. Each had an authorized complement of 8,505 men, comprising a parachute regiment and two glider regiments. U.S. airborne troops dropped in front of the fi rst assault waves that carried out HUSKY, the invasion of Sicily. They were heavily engaged in perimeter defense against German and Italian counterattacks. General  George S. Patton  then called upon 2,000 more to jump as critical reinforcements behind the American invasion beach. A terrible friendly fi re incident led USN and U.S. Army anti-aircraft gunners to shoot down 10 percent of the reinforcements, with signifi cant loss of both aircraft and lives. But the airborne troops who landed were crucial to holding off a German armored counterattack that pressed hard against the narrow beachhead. Two U.S. airborne divisions jumped or glided into the Côtentin peninsula in Normandy on D-Day: the 82nd “All American” and 101st “Screaming Eagles” landed behind UTAH and OMAHA beaches. They were
Air Corps
19
nearly all badly scattered and dispersed and took high casualties as they engaged in hard fi ghting over the fi rst week of the  Normandy campaign , including against veteran Fallschirmjäger deployed as light infantry in the Côtentin peninsula hedgerow country (bocage). The same American divisions made a second combat jump into the Netherlands during MARKET GARDEN. They were deployed on the ground as emergency, veteran infantry during the opening confusion of the Wehrmacht’s  Ardennes offensive  in December 1944. They were critical in disrupting the German drive toward Antwerp, with the 101st notably holding out at Bastogne after  becoming completely surrounded. N one of the fi ve U.S. airborne divisions fi elded during the war had organic air transport. They were delivered to their drop zones by USAAF C-47 Dakotas or in towed-gliders, notably the Waco CG-4A. U.S. 13th and 17th Divisions completed training stateside and were deployed to the ETO before the end of 1944. The 11th Division was sent to the Pacifi c, where it carried out several combat drops on Luzon in late 1944. The four American airborne divisions in the ETO were expanded to an offi cial complement of 12,979 men each in December 1944. That was only a paper reform that had little or no impact on airborne operations. The last Western airborne operation of the European war was a joint combat jump made by British 6th Division and American 17th Division across the Rhine on March 23, 1945, in Operation VARSITY. Despite the fact that other American ground forces and elements of French 1st Army were already over the Rhine farther south, VARSITY was carried off as planned. Regardless of exhaustive advance preparation by Field Marshal  Bernard Law Montgomery,  the jumps incurred heavy casualties among the airborne component.  See also  Air Commando; recoilless guns; Otto Skorzeny; Slovak Uprising; WESERÜBUNG .

CODE: TT

Development of Political Science as a Field of Study

10

The Development of Political Science as a Field of Study

The Greeks as we have seen established a broad definition of politics. However, between the sixteenth and early twentieth centuries, European political philosophers established a narrower definition of politics. For example, Jean Bodin (1430-1596), a French political philosopher, who first used the term “political science” (science politique) was a lawyer. Because of his legal training, Bodin focused on the characteristics of the state more than any other aspect of the political process. He concentrated on analyzing the relationship between the organization of the state and how this relates to law. Another French philosopher Montesquieu (1689-1755) argued that the functions of government could be encompassed within the categories of legislation, execution, and the adjudication of law.

Montesquieu categories found their way into the United States Constitution and other 119 Republican Constitutions with the assumption that liberty was best assured by separation of powers between the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. It was the work of these two philosophers that imposed a restricted definition of politics on political scientists. Political scientist for years concentrated almost exclusively on the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary as major concern until recently. In the mid-nineteenth century, Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection began to exert a powerful influence upon political science. In fact, Biology came to reinforce history in the study of political institutions, which were seen as the product of historical change and, apparently organic evolution.

The development of sociology after the 19th century prompted political scientists to give more attention to the impact on government of social forces not defined with reference to the institutional outline of the state. The industrialization of previously agricultural societies and sharpening clash between the emergent working classes and their employers (industrialists) compelled a closer study of economic facts, forces and trends, as these produced political problems and helped to shape political behaviour.

The advent of World War II brought about a re-think by political scientist that Legislature, Executives, agencies, and the Courts did not exist by themselves and that they did not operate independently of one another or of the other political organizations in society. Political scientists in America and Europe embarked on new fields of study by examining the political parties, interest groups, trade unions, as well as corporations and church organizations. Ideologies have also commanded the attention of political scientists because of their (ideologies) role in the formation of Ultra-Right and Ultra-Left political parties and movements.

It is all the above institutions of the state plus other political and social organization that constitute the political system. What this mean is that politics is not just about government and politicians but a complex process involving everybody in a given society, attitudes to issues, interest groups, group organization, electioneering, as well as the formulation, implementation, and interpretation of law. SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 1 Define politics and describe the development of political science as a field of study.

CODE: 22

Introduction to Political Science

9

Definitions/Explanations of Politics

Generally speaking, it is difficult to define politics because there are many definitions by various scholars that conflict or sometimes complement one another. Ernest Baker (1962:1) stated that politics is the process of making and execution of governmental decisions or policies. Harold Lesswell and Abraham Kaplan (1950) defined politics as authoritative, allocation of values or who gets what, when and how. Austine Ranany (1975: 35-38) maintained that politics is a process of resolution of conflict in society. For Max Weber, (1947:145-154) politics is the operation of the state and its institutions. Politics for him, means the sharing power to influence the distribution of power among individuals and groups within a state.

Lasswell suggests that politics is essentially the struggle for positions of power and influence by which those who succeed in monopolizing such positions in society are able to make decisions that affect the lives of every citizen within the country. More will be said about power later when we examine it as a topic on its own. For our purpose, politics can simply be defined in three ways: First, it attempts to discover the general principles, formation and functioning of government. Secondly, it is concerned with people and the way in which they make decisions and the way those decisions are reached. Thirdly 118 politics is that part of the social sciences which treats the foundations of the state and the principle of government, governmental, social and economic programmes, international relations, organizations and cooperation. Politics goes beyond the activity of government, the political parties and the politicians.

Politics is a universal phenomenon- that is, it is present in all human organization such as the family, trade unions, corporations, universities, etc. In all these organizations, politics is characterized by struggle for power and influence, conflict, bargaining, reconciliation, resolution and consensus. Politics can be played at a national level or internationally. At the national level, the failure of the Nigerian political elite between 1962-66 gave the military the opportunity to intervene in our political process. History repeated itself in 1983 when the political elite again failed to settle their differences following the 1983 October general elections. Again, the military employing their monopoly over the use of force and the acquiescence of the Nigerian people swept the political elite off the political stage and ruled until 1999. Similarly, it was politics at the international level when the Palestinian and the Israelites partly resolved their age-long military/ideological confrontation over Palestinian home land in Gaza. Also it was a political action/decision when ECOMOG troops were sent by West African States to war-torn Liberia for peace-keeping operations. This helped to stop the fighting from getting worse. Peace has now returned to Liberia after 15 years of fighting.

CODE: 88

Nature and Scope of Political Science

8

THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Objectives

3.0 Main Content

3.1 Definitions/Explanations of Politics

3.2 The Development of Political Science as a Field of Study

3.3 What is Science? What makes Political Science a Science?

3.4 The Meaning of Verifiability

3.5 The Meaning of Systematic

3.6 The Meaning of Generality or Universality

1.0 INTRODUCTION In this unit, you will be introduced to what Politics is all about.

In your day to day activities, you must have heard of the word Politics without actually understanding its meaning. What do you think is Politics? This question has been asked many times in every age before the birth of Jesus Christ – when the Greeks first introduced the idea of the ‘polis’ meaning city-state. It is from ‘polis’ that we derive our modern word politics. Aristotle (384-322 BC) in his book POLITICS first used the term politics to refer to the affairs of a Greek city-state. Aristotle observed that ‘man by nature is a political animal’. By this he meant that the essence of social existence is politics and that two or more men interacting with one another are invariably involved in a political relationship. Aristotle observed that whenever men seek to define their position in society or as they attempt to achieve personal security from available resources and as they try to influence others to accept their points of 117 view, they find themselves engaged in politics. In this broad sense, every one is a politician.

Today, the word politics is an elastic one. To some authorities, politics is concerned with the ordinary day-to-day activities of the community in which we are all personally involved. To others, including Harold Lasswell, politics has been equated with the study of power or the study of influence and the influential. In fact, Lasswel went as far as to define politics as “who gets what, when how” which underlines the importance of power as the major ingredient of politics.

2.0 OBJECTIVES At the end of this unit, you should be able to:

· explain what politics is all about

· explain the development of political science as a subject of study and why political science is regarded as a science.

CODE: GG

Is Political Science Really a Science?

7

What is Science? What Makes Political Science a Science?

Pure science is concerned with obtaining accurate knowledge about the structure and behaviour of the physical universe. It deals with universal and with rational analysis of known facts. It is fact seeking as well as fact-using. The ultimate goal of a science is the classification of facts, and on the basis of such classification, the formulation of a body of general rules and logically consistent and universally valid statement about the universe. Science has been described as an “adventure of the human spirit”. The scientific method entails vigorous procedures starting from selection of problems to be solved or analysed, followed by formulation of hypothesis, gathering of data and testing of hypothesis, and finally, the use of findings to refute, modify or support existing theories.

To evaluate the findings of their own studies and of others, scientists employ a number of knowledge, to be scientific it must be characterized by verifiability; it must be systematic and must, have general applicability.

3.4 The Meaning of Verifiability

A proposition is said to be verified when it has been checked or tested by many specialists in the relevant field of study and when they all agree that other scientists and the general public can believe it to be true. However, there are no certainties in anything but probabilities. The probability that some propositions will hold true, is so great that they can be treated as certainties, but in the social sciences, this is not the case. If scientific knowledge is to be verifiable, science must be empirical, that is, scientific statements must be descriptive of the empirical world. Similarly, if scientific knowledge is to be verifiable, the desire for reliability and, ultimately, for verifiability has been the chief factor leading to the adoption of quantitative methods.

3.5 The Meaning of Systematic

Knowledge is said to be systematic when it is organized into an intelligible pattern, or structure, with significant relationships made clear. To achieve a system, scientists seek out similarities and differences putting things together. While looking for similarities and differences, scientists also look for relationship, whether correlations or causal relations. Concern for system means that scientists want to proceed from particular towards general facts, from knowledge of 121 isolated facts towards knowledge of connections between facts. Thus, “the ideal of science is to achieve a systematic inter-connection of facts”.

3.6 The Meaning of Generality or Universality

The knowledge provided by a telephone directory anywhere in the world is verifiable, and it is presented in an orderly and systematic way. However, it lacks generality or universality in the sense that a New York Telephone Directory is useless in the City of Lagos. The object in science is to develop generalizations so that explanation and prediction can occur to the maximum possible extent. Scientific knowledge on any subject, designed to facilitate explanation and prediction can be thought of as a pyramid rising from a base of specific bits of data up through more general facts to propositions, laws, and theories. Turning to the second part of our questions: Is political science really scientific? Political science may be defined as the study of politics using some scientific tools. Political science is not and cannot be an exact science in the sense of the natural sciences like physics, chemistry, geology, etc. The reasons for this are that the subject matter which political scientists investigate is generally uncertain in forms – that is, people are generally unpredictable. Thus, the conclusions reached after investigations are dubious and the findings are not all of general or universal applicability.

Political science is not an exact science like the natural sciences because the material with which it deals is incapable of being treated exactly the same way as physics or chemistry. While physics and chemistry are natural or physical science, and deal with matter; the social sciences which include political science, sociology, economics, etc. deal with man in society. Man in society is not only unpredictable but also extremely cumbersome to observe accurately because he is ever-changing and his environment is difficult to control. Political science like other social sciences has a scientific character because of the scientific method it employ in examining phenomena. That is, it is a science to the extent that it accumulates facts that are verifiable, links these facts together in causal sequences (systematically) and from these, makes generalizations of fundamental principles and formulate theories.

The laboratory method of the natural science may be difficult for political scientists to adopt but they could observe historical facts and the facts of contemporary world as the basis for political analysis, 122 classify, connect and compare. However, political scientists do not agree on the appropriate categories for classifying the phenomena of politics. This disagreement reflects the difficulty of observing and the frequent impossibility of quantifying the variables that political scientists identify. Finally, because political scientists deal with large numbers of people in an uncontrolled setting where each individual has many behavioural options open to him, it is near impossible to make generalization on observed facts. The most crucial fact is how one defines, much less measure, political power and influence the very substance of the political process. Our assessment of political power will be highlighted when we examine power, authority and influence in another unit.

SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 2 Is Political Science a science or an art subject?

4.0 CONCLUSION The development of Political science as a discipline shows its attempt in enhancing its scientific status. We are however informed that political science is not and cannot be an exact science in the sense of the natural sciences like physics, chemistry, geology, etc. The reasons for this are uncertainty and unpredictability of the subject matter which political scientists investigate.

5.0 SUMMARY In this unit, you have been exposed to what politics is about; the development of political science as a distinct field of study and its scientific status. We tried here to show you that although there is no universally acceptable definition of the word “politics”, however, there are some working definitions that will guide you as new “entrants” in the field.

6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT

i. Discuss what you understand by the term politics.

ii. Describe the development of political science over the years.

iii. Why are the natural sciences more ‘scientific’ than political science? 

CODE: 55

Basic Concepts and Theories in Political Science

7

Keywords: basic concepts in political science

Basic Concepts / Theories

            The Political System is made of three (3) important parts:

                        a) The Political Regime

                        b) The Political Personnel

                        c) The Political Community

The Regime - is the structure of the institutional configuration of government e.g., in U. S. we have three branches of government and different levels of government e.g., federal, state, and local.

The Political Personnel - are the people in government at any particular time or place e.g., Richard Nixon was the political personnel in the office of the Presidency during 1969 - 1974.

The distinction between the regime and personnel can be seen in the change that occurred with the following:

            President Richard Nixon in USA

            Adolph Hitler in Pre WWII Germany

            In the U. S. Nixon resigned as President but the office of the Presidency continued,

            we changed personnel but not regime.

In Germany there was no change in personnel but there was an important change in regime.  Germany went from a democracy to an authoritarian and then a totalitarian regime under Adolph Hitler’s leadership.

The Political Community are all those affected by government.

There are three (3) models of how the political process works within the political regime.

            1) Elitism

            2) Participatory Democracy

            3) Pluralism

 http://www.kean.edu/~ckelly/basicconcepts.doc

Elitism maintains society is hierarchically organized with a few deciding and the many following.  Elitism makes no claim of being democratic.

There are two (2) variations of elitism:

1) One school of thought maintains that elitism is natural and can be beneficial for society

                e.g., Plato’s Republic wise philosopher-kings will rule for the betterment of society.

            2) Another school of thought maintains that elitism is inevitable to do human nature,

bureaucracy, or the economic system.  This school maintains that elitism is an exploitative type

of system, where the rulers exploit the ruled e.g., Marx maintain that in Feudalism and Capitalism the rulers ruled in their own interest at the expense  of the many.  (See Chart I)

Participatory Democracy maintains that in order for the political system to be truly democratic, society has to be democratized, i.e., all structure in society, family, job, church, etc. have to abandon their hierarchical structure and become democratic.

In order to appreciate what the proponents of participatory democracy are saying it is useful to view democracy on a continuum ranging from pure totalitarianism to pure democracy.

ABSOLUTE                                      Reality                                    ABSOLUTE

Totalitarianism------------------------------------------------------------Pure Democracy

e.g. George Orwell’s             Somewhere in between                      Equal Influence

          1984                                                                                                 for all

Proponents of Participatory Democracy wants to break down the hierarchical structure and move toward collective decision-making where the many are deciding their own fate.  Some proponents of Participatory Democracy concede that it is impractical to achieve absolute equality of influence but nonetheless that should be the goal of society e.g. Marx’s Communist Utopia.

Pluralism maintains that the political system is hierarchically structured, i.e., there are a few deciding and many follows.  Despite this fact, pluralism maintains democracy is possible, i.e., the many can make the few responsive, accountable and accessible.  The way this is done is as follows:

            1) No one group in society has a monopoly of power.

            2) In order to make governmental policy coalitions of groups have to be formed and

                groups in society are pragmatic enough to work out compromises.

            3) There is a basic consensus w/n society that rules out violence as a legitimate

                 way to resolve group conflict.

                        a) this consensus also involves a widespread agreement on a mechanism for

                            making decisions.,

                        b) this mechanism is considered legitimate i.e., the losers are willing to comply

                            with the decision of the winners.

                        c) another requirement is that the winners permit the losers to criticize and

                            challenge the winners’ decision.     See figure-1, Pluralism.gif

A Pluralist democracy is characterized by competition by power by organized groups.  The unorganized have little or no power in the political system.

Political Regime - regardless of the type of regime all regimes seek legitimacy.  Legitimacy is the tacit or explicit support of the regime by its people.  Usually it is an emotional identification with the regime.  The regime is legitimate when the people believe that institutional structures of the government are the most appropriate for society.

There are various sources of legitimacy.  Max Weber speaks of three (3) ideal types of legitimacy:

            1) Traditional - people support the regime out of habit and custom.

            2) Rational legal - people support the regime because the explicit rules and procedures of

                government make sense to the people--the people prefer on rational grounds the rule

                of law over other types of rule.

            3) Charismatic - people support the regime because of an emotional identification with the

                personality of the leader of the regime.

According to Weber we find mixes of the three (3) types of legitimacy in every society but it is possible to categorize regime by the dominant source of legitimacy.  (See Chart II)

Political Culture - In order to understand legitimacy it is important to comprehend the political culture of society.

Political culture is the values, beliefs, attitudes and aspirations of the people in society which orient them politically.  In order for a regime to be legitimate there has to be widespread agreement in society on certain sets of values i.e., some sort of a consensus.

Ideology is an explicit set of values that orients people in society in terms of what they can expect from government and what government should do for them and society.  It speaks to human nature, the role of government in society and the relationship of politics and economics.  It also advances the economic interests of a social class in society.

The three (3) main ideologies of politics are Conservatism, Liberalism and socialism.  There are many variations of the ideologies i.e., fascism, Nazism, communism, populism, etc., but they all can be traced back to one or more of three.  (See Chart III)

POLITICAL SCIENCE

LECTURE NOTES                                                                          DR. CHARLES KELLY

CHART I

MARX’S THEORY OF HISTORY – ECONOMIC DETERMINISM

Stages of History	Environment	Societal Relationships	Territorial Political Units	Classes	Source of Legitimacy	Economic System
Primitive Communism	Abundance	Harmony	None	None	None	None
Feudalism	Scarcity	Conflict	City-state	Noble vs. Peasants	Religion	Agrarian
Capitalism	Less Scarcity	Conflict	Nation-state	Bourgeoisie       vs. Proletariat	Nationalism	Industrial
Socialism	Least Scarcity	Conflict	Regional Camps	Proletariat      vs. Bourgeoisie	Working-class Consciousness	Highly Industrialized
Communism	Sufficiency	Harmony	Global Society	None	Equality	Nearly Automated

CHART II

WEBER’S TYPOLOGY OF DIFFERENT POLITICAL REGIMES

(THE TYPE OF REGIME LEGITIMACY INFLUENCES POLITICAL STABILITY)

TYPES OF LEGITIMACY	PROBLEM I Dealing with Transfer of Power	PROBLEM II Dealing with the Pheno- menon of Change	POLITICAL STABILITY (Dealing with Problems  I & II)
CHARISMATIC (Regime accepted by the   People because of the  personality of its leader)	Deals Poorly (Cannot Transfer   Personality of Leader)	Deals Well (Can Muster Necessary    Political will	Less Stable
TRADITIONAL (Regime accepted because  it based on tradition and  custom)	Deals Well (e.g., law of primogeniture)	Deals Poorly (Can not break   with   Tradition	Less Stable
RATIONAL - LEGAL (Regime accepted because   procedures are perceived  logical and reasonable)	Deals Well (Elections, explicit line of  succession)	Deals Well (Legislation, Amendments  and judicial review)	Most Stable

CHART III

MAJOR IDEOLOGIES

                         Class                 Historical               Economic                Role of                  Nature of               Source of

                                Constituency        Origins                   System                   Government         Man                       Power                 

Conservatism	Nobility	18th Century	Mercantilism	Paternalistic (Strong  Government)	Anti-Social	Land
Liberalism	Middle Class	19th Century	Capitalism	Laissez Faire (Weak Government)	Social	Commerce
Socialism	Working Class	20th Century	Centrally Owned and Planned Economy	Interventionist (Strong Government	Malleable	Numbers & Organizations

Dr. Charles P. Kelly

http://www.kean.edu/~ckelly/basicconcepts.doc (ms-word/97 )

----- End -----

CODE: 11