Government Systems, Policy Analysis & Political Theory

Political science examines how societies organize power, make collective decisions, and distribute resources through governance. This pack covers political theory, comparative government systems, electoral mechanics, policy analysis, and international relations — the core analytical framework for understanding politics.

## Political Theory Foundations

Political philosophy asks foundational questions: What legitimizes authority? What is justice? What rights do individuals hold against the state?

SCT (social contract theory) provides the dominant Western legitimacy framework. Hobbes: without government, the state of nature is "war of all against all" — rational actors surrender liberty to a sovereign (LEV — Leviathan) for security. Locke: natural rights (life, liberty, property) precede government — the state exists to protect them; if it violates them, revolution is legitimate. Rousseau: the GNW (general will) of the people is sovereign — legitimate government expresses collective self-determination, not individual consent.

Modern ideological spectrum: LIB (liberalism — individual rights, limited government, market economy, rule of law), CON (conservatism — tradition, organic social order, skepticism of rapid change, Burke's "little platoons"), SOC (socialism — collective ownership, economic equality, worker control of MOP), and LBT (libertarianism — minimal state, maximum individual freedom, skepticism of ALL government intervention beyond protecting rights).

Rawls' "Theory of Justice" (1971) remains the most influential modern framework. The OPS (original position) thought experiment: behind a VoI (veil of ignorance — not knowing your race, class, gender, abilities, or values), what principles would rational actors choose? Rawls argues for: (1) equal basic liberties for all, and (2) the DPR (difference principle) — inequality is only justified if it benefits the least advantaged members of society. Nozick's libertarian critique: justice is about process (legitimate acquisition and transfer), not distribution patterns — any distribution arising from voluntary exchange is just.

## Comparative Government Systems

PRS (presidential) systems: separate executive and legislative election and terms. President is head of state AND government. Fixed terms provide stability but create GRD (gridlock) when different parties control branches (divided government). No confidence mechanism — removal only through IMP (impeachment), which is rare and quasi-judicial. Examples: US, Brazil, Mexico, Nigeria.

PRL (parliamentary) systems: executive (PM — prime minister + cabinet) drawn from and accountable to the legislature. PM serves at legislative confidence — can be removed by vote of no confidence, triggering new elections or government formation. Fuses executive and legislative power → easier policy implementation but weaker checks. Coalition governments common in multi-party systems. Examples: UK, Germany, Japan, India, Canada.

SPR (semi-presidential): separately elected president + PM responsible to parliament. Power balance varies — French model gives president significant authority (foreign policy, defense, appointing PM); other versions (e.g., Austria) make presidency mostly ceremonial. COH (cohabitation): president and PM from different parties — creates tension and power negotiation.

FED (federal) vs. UNT (unitary) systems: FED divides sovereignty between national and subnational governments (US, Germany, India, Brazil) — each level has constitutionally protected authority. UNT concentrates sovereignty at the national level, delegating to local governments at its discretion (UK, France, Japan). FED accommodates diversity and regional autonomy but creates coordination challenges and potential veto points.

## Electoral Systems & Voting Behavior

Electoral systems profoundly shape party systems and representation:

FPTP (first-past-the-post/plurality): highest vote count wins, single-member districts. Tends toward two-party systems (Duverger's law) because third parties are punished — winning 20% everywhere yields zero seats. Produces strong single-party governments but "wasted" votes and geographic distortion. Examples: US, UK, Canada, India.

PRE (proportional representation): seats allocated proportionally to vote share. Multi-member districts or national lists. Produces multi-party systems, coalition governments, better descriptive representation. Threshold (usually 3-5%) prevents extreme fragmentation. Variants: party list (closed vs. open), STV (single transferable vote). Examples: Netherlands, Sweden, Israel, South Africa.

MMP (mixed-member proportional): combines FPTP district seats with PR compensatory seats. Voters cast two ballots — district and party. PR seats correct the disproportionality of district results. Example: Germany (5% threshold), New Zealand.

Voting behavior research identifies multiple influence models: SMD (sociological model — class, religion, ethnicity predict vote), MIM (Michigan model — PID — party identification, acquired through SCZ, filters perception of candidates and issues), RCM (rational choice model — voters maximize utility based on retrospective performance evaluation or prospective policy promises).

ECN (economic voting): incumbents rewarded for good economic performance, punished for bad. "It's the economy, stupid" — retrospective evaluation of personal and national economic condition is the single strongest short-term predictor of vote choice in established democracies.

## Policy Analysis

The policy process (Kingdon's model): three streams must converge for policy change — PRB (problem stream — issue gains attention through focusing events, indicators, feedback), POL (policy stream — viable solutions developed by EPCs — epistemic communities and think tanks), and PLT (political stream — public mood, election results, interest group pressure). When streams align, a PWN (policy window) opens and PCE (policy entrepreneurs) push solutions onto the agenda.

Stages model: AGS (agenda setting) → FRM (formulation) → ADT (adoption/legitimation) → IMP (implementation) → EVL (evaluation). In practice, stages overlap and cycle. Implementation is where many policies fail — street-level bureaucrats (Lipsky) exercise enormous discretion, effectively making policy through daily decisions about resource allocation and rule application.

Policy analysis tools: CBA (cost-benefit analysis — monetize all costs and benefits, discount future values, compare net present value), CEA (cost-effectiveness analysis — when outcomes cannot be monetized, compare cost per unit of outcome), RIA (regulatory impact assessment — estimate compliance costs, distributional effects, and unintended consequences before adoption).

Iron triangles: stable, mutually beneficial relationships between congressional committees, executive agencies, and interest groups — each provides what the others need (legislation, implementation, campaign support/expertise). Issue networks (Heclo): more fluid, open, and conflict-ridden policy communities have replaced iron triangles in many domains.

## International Relations

Three dominant IR theories:

REL (realism): the international system is anarchic (no world government). States are primary actors, motivated by national interest defined as power. Security is the primary concern. Balance of power prevents hegemony. Military capability is the ultimate currency. Cooperation is fragile and instrumental. Morgenthau (classical), Waltz (structural/neorealism — system structure constrains state behavior regardless of domestic politics).

LBL (liberalism/liberal institutionalism): international institutions, economic interdependence, and democratic governance can mitigate anarchy. Keohane and Nye: complex interdependence — multiple channels connect societies, military force is not dominant, no clear hierarchy of issues. Democratic peace theory: democracies rarely fight each other (strongest empirical finding in IR). International organizations (IGOs — UN, WTO, EU) reduce transaction costs, provide information, and facilitate cooperation.

CSV (constructivism): the international system is socially constructed — not determined by material forces alone. Ideas, norms, identities, and culture shape state interests and behavior. Anarchy is "what states make of it" (Wendt). The spread of human rights norms, the taboo against nuclear weapons use, and the evolution of sovereignty demonstrate ideational change in IR.

SEC (security studies): traditional (military threats, deterrence, arms control) vs. expanded agenda (human security — poverty, disease, environmental threats, food insecurity). Nuclear DET (deterrence): MAD (mutually assured destruction) maintained Cold War stability through second-strike capability. Credibility problems: would a president actually launch a civilization-ending retaliation? Extended DET (protecting allies) faces even greater credibility gaps.

IPE (international political economy): how politics shapes economic relations and vice versa. Trade politics: free trade theory (comparative advantage, all parties gain) vs. distributional reality (some sectors and workers lose — Stolper-Samuelson). MNC (multinational corporations) operate across jurisdictions, creating regulatory arbitrage opportunities. The BOP (balance of payments) and exchange rates are inherently political — currency manipulation, capital controls, and trade deficits spark interstate conflict.

GGL (global governance): managing transnational problems without world government. Climate change, pandemic response, financial regulation, migration, and cybersecurity all require multilateral coordination. Collective action problems (free-riding, defection) make cooperation difficult, especially when costs are immediate and benefits are diffuse and long-term.