David Eastons Model of Political Systems - Coursework Example

DAVID EASTON’S MODEL OF POLITICAL SYSTEMS David Easton’s Model of Political Systems David Easton’s model of political systems for comparative political analysis postulates that all political cultures are comprised of traditions, values, and common knowledge. It holds that citizens invariably have expectations and, for that reason, place demands on the political system. All the same, they also maintain the system in various ways: they may participate in government, vote, or simply obey the laws of the state. Citizens’ demands and support, influenced by the political culture comprising their beliefs about what is and should be happening in society, affect the political system’s decision-making capacity. From this ongoing process, governmental decisions and actions emerge, usually in such forms as edicts, laws, and orders. For example, in a democratic government like the United States of America, elections are free and fair, their values embrace a corruption free government while an authoritarian regime like the one in Zimbabwe, the elections are not free and fair, the government is corrupt and high levels of poverty ensues among her citizens (Almond, 1956, pg. 32). David Easton’s model of political systems for comparative political analysis seeks to find out regularities and variations of a political association by comparative analysis of historical and modern-day systems. Having secluded these regularities and variations, it aims to determine the factors that underlie them, and identify and discover the properties and conditions of polities of varying types. The model also endeavors to reduce these examinations to a series of interconnected schemes pertinent to all these structures in both stationary and evolving circumstances (Easton, 1957, pg. 33). The relevance of static systems and switching systems result from the engagements of the “mass” with the ruling class or other political entities that run the government. Although Easton’s approach to modeling political institutions as a black box that turns inputs into outputs is simple, even simplistic, it does provide a framework for understanding important political outcomes. The approach stresses three forms of supports into the system; support for the government, for the regime, and for the political community, which refers to the extent of attachment to an overarching identity. This model also believes in the value of diversity, of many centers of power, many approaches to knowledge and in the usefulness of moderated competition between centers of power and ideas or viewpoints. It stresses on the benefits of social and cultural diversity, a variety of institutions, values, groups, and ways of life and of liberal means of handling this diversity in a tolerant fashion. All forms of pluralism are opposed to ‘monism’. Pluralism is a liberal belief, which derives from an active component of historical, political thought centering on the need to prevent tyrannical rule by a single person, faction or majority. Pluralists emphasize on; embodying civil rights in a constitution, including toleration and freedom of speech, creating ‘balanced’ arrangements of institutions, such as the separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers, creating decentralized federal systems of government (Bakshi, 1976, pg. 22). Easton’s theory can further be broken down into the tenets of support required for the system, that is, support for the government, support for the regime, as well as support for the political structure. It is essential to support the government, as it manages the country and ensures that the citizens get satisfactory governmental services. For instance, the government is required to provide security of her people as part of maintaining law and order. Without people’s support, all the government’s initiatives go to waste, and hence the government becomes a useless system in the eyes of the citizens. Thus, a possible outcome if the government is not supported would be a military coup or a total loss of monopoly over the means of coercion in a country. The other system for which support is required is the regime. Every country has a regime that rules it at any one given time. For example, in America we have the democrats and the republicans. Whether it is the Democrats’ regime in power or the republican regime, one thing that stands out is that the people must support the regime. A lack of support for the regime only hastens its collapse in the end. Support for the system is achieved through ratifications of fundamental governing laws by parliament and the payment of taxes by citizens among others. The political community is also a system that requires support. The political community provides a country and its people with an identity based on the fundamental principles fronted via the existing political orientations. Citizens support political orientations because they believe in the principles that govern particular political systems (Easton, 1981, pg. 22). Easton’s model is also useful due to its belief in the value if diversity as a driver of political systems. Many political systems are founded on the principle of diversity. Diversity elucidated through the existence of various languages, races, political subscriptions, as well as voters voting for different candidates in an election. Diversity creates perspective in a system, which makes the system stronger by the presence of incongruent ideologies, creeds, and beliefs. Another pillar of Easton’s model is the subscription to several centers of power. For instance, in America there is the judiciary, the executive, and the legislature. Each of these centers of power is charged with the achievement of specific functions within the government structure. These centers of power complement each other in the execution of the duties of the government thus ensuring smooth running of government affairs. Besides, having many centers of power ensures that decisions are made objectively. Additionally, the many centers of power moderate and complement each other thus ensuring that no single entity carries the burden of decision-making in government. The other essential facet in Easton’s theory is the demands placed on the system by the citizens or the subjects. Today, the populace places demands on the political class such as the demand for more jobs. These demands ensure the constant pressure in the political class or the government. Due to the pressure, the political class has to act to yield outcomes towards the demand of the citizens. The outcomes can be two-fold; one scenario is where the political class fulfills the needs of the citizens and the second scenario is where the political class thwarts the requirements of the citizens. Each of the outcomes has consequences. One – fulfillment of the needs of the citizens - can result in a general orientation by the population towards the government; while the other – thwarting of the requirements of the citizens – can lead to public dissent towards the government. The latter case has much more ugly outcomes associated with it such as uprisings and coups. In Zimbabwe, the latter case is true, and for this reason, the government has to use unorthodox means of coercion to maintain a monopoly over the means of coercion. In the United States, the government fulfills most of the demands of the population, and the likelihood of dissent is minimal, ensuring stability in the system. The model also emphasizes pluralism, which is an important orientation for the survival of any political entity. In America, for example, there are freedoms that ensure that everyone is heard, and their points of view taken into consideration (Sorzano, 1975, pg. 15). In Zimbabwe, the converse is true; plurality is discouraged as the government makes all decisions without listening to dissenting opinions from the populace. Neglecting the voices of citizens creates a system based on anarchy that must be muzzled government to perform its duties. When the citizens brave these muzzles, then the state falls apart in acts of revolution. It is apparent that Easton’s model of political systems for comparative analysis is extremely useful for understanding different polities. The model emphasizes pluralism, diversity, subscription to several centers of power, and demands by citizens on the ruling class (Easton, 1981, pg. 25). Pluralism ensures the satisfaction of the citizens with the decision-making realm of government. Diversity provides that states do not discriminate any of their citizens in the decision-making process, as well as the production of core goodies. Subscription to various centers of power ensures that the decision-making process by the government is as inclusive as possible by taking in advice from other branches of governance. Demands by the citizens on the ruling class make sure that the government feels pressure and thus can deliver on the goodies needed by the citizens. All these realms of Easton’s theory make it stand out in terms of understanding various political and governmental systems. Finally, Easton’s theory provides the frameworks for understanding different systems of governance and its operations. The classic cases described within are those of the United States and Zimbabwe. In Zimbabwe, the government is authoritarian while in the US the government is created on democratic principles. The varying orientation of the United States and Zimbabwe can easily be explained using Easton’s theory. In Zimbabwe, the government does not allow pluralism, diversity, and various centers of power. This orientation leaves the government as the sole dictator of what happens to the populace. The government and the ruling class can adopt and dismiss policies at their behest without worrying about the citizens. The citizens also stay at bay with the massive corruption that persists. In the end, poor national economy results, and this leaves the citizens dependent on aid from other countries. In contrast, the US is the direct opposite. The US allows for varying centers of power, diversity, and pluralism. This orientation keeps the government in check, ensuring that it delivers goodies to its citizens. Besides, the various centers of power provide that objective decisions that bear the goodwill of the citizens are necessary. The population also has a platform where they can pursue their interests without government shackling. Besides, the US does not tolerate vices like corruption. In the end, a strong economy results, and this makes the country more and more successful in fulfilling the needs of the populace. List of References AJAY, G., 1996, Marxism, “Authoritarianism and Peoples Movements”, Economic and Political Weekly. Vol. 31, No. 13 (Mar. 30, 1996), pp. 847-848 ALMOND, G. A., 1956, “Comparative Political Systems”, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 18, No. 3 (Aug. 1956), pp. 391-409. ASTIN, J. D., 1972, “Easton I and Easton II”, The Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 4 (Dec. 1972), pp. 726-737. BAKSHI, O. P., 1976, “Political Theory and the Scientific Study of Politics: Reflections on David Eastons Concept of Political Theory”, The Indian Journal of Political Science Vol. 37, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec. 76), pp. 97-114. EASTON, D., 1957, “An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems”, World Politics, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Apr. 1957), pp. 383-400. EASTON, D., 1976, “Theoretical Approaches to Political Support”, Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Sep. 1976), pp. 431-448 EASTON, D., 1957, “An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems”, World Politics, Vol. 9, No. 3 (1957), pp. 383-400. EASTON, D., 1981, “The Political System Besieged by the State”, Political Theory, Vol. 9, No. 3 (1981), pp. 303-325 EASTON, D., 1953, “The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science”, New York: Alfred Knopf. EASTON, D., 1976, “Theoretical Approaches to Political Support”, Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Sep., 1976), pp. 431-448. FROHOCK, F. M., 1974, “Notes on the Concept of Politics: Weber, Easton, Strauss”, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 36, No. 2 (May 1974), pp. 379-408. KAPLAN, M. A., 1968, “Systems Theory and Political Science”, Social Research, Vol. 35, No. 1, Focus Trends and Issues in American Political Science (SPRING 1968), pp. 30-47. LIPSET, S. M., 1994, “The Social Requisites of Democracy Revisited: 1993 Presidential Address”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 59, No. 1 (Feb., 1994), pp. 1-22 NORDLINGER, E. A., LOWI, T. J. AND FABBRINI, S., 1988, “The Return to the State: Critiques”, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 82, No. 3 (1988), pp. 875-901. SORZANO, J. S., 1975, “David Easton and the Invisible Hand”, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 69, No. 1 (1975), pp. 91-106. Read More