418 pARTFIVE INTERNATIONALPOLITICS

United Nat10nS EnvironmentalProgramme page of updates on negotlatlOnS ln

progress for international environmental agreements
APPENDIX
h ltp..//wttW. un ep. ch/

UnlOn Of lntenlatlOnal AssociatlOnS: many llnks: PRINCIPLES OF

http:JyWWW ula, Org
POuTfCAL ANALYSIS

There are a number of basic prlnCIPles of argument and logic that students should lean
in an introductory polltical sclenCe course. In pall, these should have shown up lmPlicl
ltly ln much of the material you ha一,e already read and dlSCuSSed ln this course, but it is

also helpfuho look at them more dlreCtly･ They are included here not as a tag end or af-
terthought but because thlS Seems tO be the best way to handle them. Some instructors
may prefer to use tlm section at the beginning Of a course, some at the end, Others at
some other point Locating thlS dlSeuSSion ln an appendix leaves to the lnStruCtOr the de-
cISIOn Ofhow t() handle it.

FALSlRABILITY

The most basle PnnCIPle of political argument is that to be useful, any statement about

politics must be falsifiable･ That lS, lt must be at least potentially posslblethat the state-
ment lS not true and could therefore be falsifled･ For example, the statement "twoIParty
systems tend to produce less redistribut10n Of income than multlPally systemsH would
be falsified if we compared the two-party and multiparty systems of the worldand found
thatthere was little dlfference betweenthe two in the degree of Income redistribution
they produced The statement uTed Kennedy has shown llttle sympathy for blacks"
would be falsified lf one produced a long list of statements and actions ln Which Ted
Kennedy demonstrated sympathy for blacks･
On the other hand, Some statements about polltlCS are true by definition･ "Robert
Dole lost the 1996 presidential electlOn because most of the voters chose Bill Cllnt｡n-
1S One example ‥The poor countnes of the world are more backward econo-cally than

rlCh countnes" lS another Think about it How would you go about falsifying either of
these statements? They are true by definltlOn.
These statements could not posslbly be demonstrated to be false; therefore,they are
automatically true･ Such a statement does not tell anything abouHhe world that we did
not already know before we read the statement･ Llterally, a statement that is not falslfi-
able says nothing about the world･ Such statements are called tautologies･

The two examp一es glVen are fairly ob､10us- and so you might wonder why the impor-
tance of falslflablllry is emphasized here･ surely･ mustn･t l【 be obvious When a statement
says mothlng new? Ifso･ 1tWOuldn,t seem tobe much ofaproblem.As1thappens.
though lt lS not always immedlately clear that a statement is a tautology conslder the
fouowlng･ HAcountry wlth a large agrlCu】tural sectorand alarge lndustrlal sectorto its
economy will tend to have a small servICe Sector ･, Such a country wll】 nonend" to have
a small seⅣice sectol･: it wlll GIL仰- have a s]¶alJ one･ because -his statement js true b)
deflnltlOn Toha､,e a large agrlCuJtural sectormeans that alarge percentage of the labor
force lS employed -n agrlCulmre･ lfthe country also has a large lndustrlal sector, then an-
other large percentage of the labor force lS employed ln lndu"ry. what･s left tS the ser-
uee sector. The percentages employed ln dlfferent sectors must always sum to mo
percent, so lf the firs-opercentages are large. there cannot be much left for the service
sector･ Its percentage must by derlnltlOn be small･ and so the statement lS a tautology-
although to mostpeople lt WOuld not be ob､′10uS･ at rlrSt glance. that such was the case.
Asyou become involved ln the analysュs OfpolitlCS･ you wll】 be surpr]sed by how of-
ten statements about polncs turn out･ on closer examlnatlOn, to be true by deflnition.
We have now cleared the underbrush a bit and know that we are to deal only with
statements that are at least potentlal]y falsiflable. Clearly. however- Some of these statel
meれts wlH be more lnterestlng than others, and we don･t want to waste our tlme wlth the
unlnterestlng ones This leads us to the follow-ng questlOn:
WHAT MAKES A STATEMENT INTERESTJNG?
There are three kinds or statements about politics
'sltLtemenl5 0ffacl: These state what luhey des"]be reallty･ Examples. -The
AmerlCan president is elected for a four-year term･,･ ･'There are two major politlCa】
parties in West Germany..-･chlle and Argentina have been engaged ln a d)spufe
over boundanes for decades -
'staTemenls ofvallle･ These state how good someth-ng lS: they e-,EL/LLaTe reallty Ex-
amples･ HThe U･S･ Constltution provldes the best governmental system ln the
world:I "sales taxes are not as good as Income taxes because they are regressIVe."
"A planned economy provlde- better life for people than a free-market economy:
'Explanat("y statementLY: These state日加somethlng lS aS it lL"hey analJ三e rea】1ty･
Examples: uThe Republican party galned seats ln the 2002 Congressionalelectlons
because or the肌1 attack on the World Trade Center･･, hpeople whose parents
were lnterested ln POlltlCS tend to be especially Interested )n politics themselves.1,
"The sendlng Of unclear diplomatic signals increases the llkellhood that uar will
breakout.り
All three types of statement are appropriate areas for polltleal invesl1gat10n and argu-
ment･ whatever son of statement you make･ however, you want lt tO be interestlng･ A
statement will be relatlVely lnterestlng to the extent that lt Offers your readers somethlng
that u lS Ofconeem to them and (2) would have been dlfficult for them to accomplish
for themsel､′es That the statement must be of concern to your readers IS Obvious and re-
APPENDIX PRINCIPLES OF POLITICALANALYSIS 421
quires nO further comment･ (Most American readers, for Instance, Would not be much
concerned about the precise a汀angementS for chooslng a klng in Sweden, and state一
meれts about it would not be especially lntereStlng tO them.) However, note the further
conditlOn for interest-that the statement should offer your readers somethlng that
would have been dlfficult for them to accomplish for themselves･ This is not so obvlOuS.
Conslder two descnptlVe Statements about Congress HCongress has 535 members,=
and "Three-fourths of the members of Congress have cast a vote at one time or another
on dlreCt Instructions from a lobbyist･■l (The second of these is Imaginary and, one
hopes, false!) These two statements would be of equal concem to students of Congress,
but the second statement would be more lntereStlng tO them because lt is something that
would have been dlfficult for them to learn for themselves･ They could have learned
how many members there are in Congress by a qulCk glance ln any encyclopedia, b山it
would take a clever lnVeStlgatOr, working for a long time, to ascertaln the truth of the
second statement.
Sl血larly, `〕ustlCe is good'■ lS not an interestlng Statement Of value Presumably,
everyone would be able to agree with lt Without much thought, and so lt does not pro-
vide us with muchthat lS new However･ the statementパdiscnmlnat10n lS gOOdM is a
challenglng Statement, One that goes against the graln. It would not automatically occur
to most of your readers and would requlre a good deal of argument to be rendered plau-
slble for them. Arguing for thlS Statement requires a lot of thought, which you must pro-
vlde for your readers, and will thus be proportionately more lntereStlng tO them･
Asa final example, the explanatory statement HRich countnes wlll tend to have big一
ger armies than poor countnes" is not an Interesting eXPlanat10n Of the size Of amies,
because it is so obvlOuS that comlng uP Wlth lt did not requlre much thought "Countries
with high unemployment, and therefore cheap tat"r. wlll tend to have large armies" is a
more interestlng eXPlanatlOn Of the same thinE･ A thoroughly obv10uS, hence uninterest-
lng, eXplanatlOn is ca一led a trivial explanation
As a general ru一e, statements of value and explanatory statements requlre more
thought on the part of the writer than descrlptlVe Statements. and they are therefore more
likely to be lntereStlng StatementS･ Students wrltlng papers are Often tempted to write
descnptlVe PaperS1 1aylng Out a Set Of descrlPtlVe Statements. because this IS easier than
juStifylng Statements Of value or explanation･ You should remember that unless you
choose a challengTng descrlptlVe PrOblem･ your work will not be a particularly Interest-
ing One･ Often you will be glVen a PartlCular deserlPtlVe investigation as an exercise;
you mlght, for instance, be asked to trace the progress of a bll] through the legislative
process･ If so. descnbe away! 1f you are asked to Hwnte a te- paper about some aspect
of the leglSlative process,■'however･ you will be able to wrlte a more interestlng paper
lf you choose a quest10n Of value or of explanation･
CAUSATl0N AND EXPLANATl0N
Let us look a bit more closely at explanat10n An explanatory statement necessarily ln-
volvesthe notion of causation We explain a certalnthing by saylng that another thing
c(luSeS lt･ For example･ we might explain that the U.S. governrnent has dlfficulty making
 APPENDIX PRINCIPLESOF POLITICALANALYS】S 423
422 APPEND-X PRINCIPLESOF POL】TICALANALYSIS

0r change states of the South to Industrial states to see whether their POlltical regimes
broad. systematic policy ln areas Such as energy by blaming lt On the separatlOn Of pow-
would change or change command economies to market economleS tO See Whether they
ers ln the American system That lS, We e-rPltlEnthe exIStenCe Of the dlfflCulty by saying
would become more productlVe.
thatthe dlffieulty lS Caused by the separatlOn Of powers (Presumably thlS WOuld be be-
What we can do IS Obsene vanat10nS and changes as they occur around us andtry to
causethere are many polntS at WhlCh the pollticalpower of opponents can be decISive-
figure Out WhlCh ヽarlat10nS Or Changes actually cause other thlngS tO happen･ For In-
the presldency. elther house of Congress･ or the courtsAsa result- HdifflCult'▲ programs
stance. many states of the South･ especlally ln East Asla, are becomlng lndustrlalized, so
are hard to pass.)
we eat"atch to see how this Changes their POlltlCS The challenge ln baslng analysts On
In the example, we cannot concel､′e Of any way to explalnthe AmerlCan dlfflCulty
such Changes IS that no one thlng ever Changes ln isolation from everythlng else, in the
except to assert one or another posslble cause of the dlfficulty So to explain lS tO ana-
Way a physICISt Can arrange lt ln the laboratory. Everything lS always changlng at Once,
lyze causes
and帆e must use Our Creative sense to try to sort out -t･hE'〔h changes have caused wht'ch
What lS Causation? What does lt mean tO Say that one thing Causes another? ln gen-
others.
eral. we thlnk that to cause somethlng lS tO brTng lT ttbollT. tO bring lt forth. to produce lt.
For example･ 1n 1961, France changed its electoral system to one based on a presi-
Tuming a key causes my car to start. Russla7S opposition to a proposal causes the defeat
deneyJvhlCh should. in prlnelPle, tend to bring about a two-party systeml Over the
of the proposal lnthe United Nat10nS･ The lnCreaSlng electoral advantages of incum-
years slnCe then- France has Indeed seen a coalescence of its party system lntO five par-
bents ln U S congressional elections have caused an Increase ln the average senlOrlty Of
tleSI OrganlZed ln two WelLdefined blocs Dld the new electoral system bring about the
members of Congress. And so on.
eoalescenceりAt the same time that France was adJuStlng tO Its new electoral arrange-
Wethlnk of causation as worklng Only forward ln tlme. For one thing tO Produce an-
ments･ 1t Was also experlenClng unprecedented prosperlty, Which mlght perhaps have
otherth1ng, the hproducer''has to precede the L'product`'temporally. So lt doesn't make
made people less llkely to support small radical partleS･ AIso･ lt Was at thlS time that the
sense tothink of Ronald Reagan■s electoral victory ln 1984 as havlng Caused Walter
popular Charles de Gaulle served as presldent. He drew a large politlCal party about
Mondale to argue for tax increases dunng the 1984 campalgn.･ but lt does make sense to
himself-SomethlnE he could probably have done no matter Ⅵ′hat the e一ectoral system
thlnk of Mondalels posltlOn aS One Of the causes of Reagan's electoral vICtOry･
was-and thatknocked out se､eral smal一er partleS What, then, was the effect of the
However, temporal precedence lS not enough to establlSh one thlng aS a Cause Of an-
change ln electoral arrangements on the number of partleSり
other. We do not think of winter as causlng Sprlng, for Instance. eヽen though We know
Under such clrCumStanCeS, We Cannot be certaln Of the effects of one thlng On an-
that Hwhen wlnter comes. Spring Canlt be far behind '■ Althoughthe seasons unfold to-
other. We can and do use our common sense, asklng･ for exarnple･ what the effects of
gether, We do not thlnk of one season as bringlng the other about Slmllarlvl 1t lS Proba-
electoral systems sh()uld bet And ､∼e can look at overal一 patterns across many eases, ask-
bly true that brunettes tend to be Democrats. slnCe for hlStOrlCal reasons a number of
lng What has happened after changes of electoral system ln Other countrleS･ The result is
ethnlC groups With dark hair-blacks･ Native Americans, ChlCanOS･ SOuthern Euro-
not a firm･ indlSputable findlng but rather somethlng On Whlch to form concluslOnS and
peans-have gra､rltated to the Democratic Party AlthoughpeOple acqulre their hair somethlnE that can be dlSPuted･ There lS nothing wrong wlth thlS･
color long before they glVe a thought to Ⅵ′hich party they will support･ We do not think

of hair color as causlng peOple■s party preferences. It is on上) a colnCldence that the two

tend to vary together. ト=STORICAL EXPLANATl0N

PolltlCal sclentlStS Put a great deal of effort Into trylng tO sort Out What thlngS Cause
A natural afflnitv betweer日he field of hlStOry and what we have been dlSCuSSlng Should
the thlngS ln Which we are lntereSted･ Why does the Unlted States ha一e only two major
be apparent to you HIStOrlanS follow a senes of events as they move forward in tlme,
partleS-7 Why are states of the South less likely than Western states to be welレ
llnkLngthem to one another･ ThlS is much llke the analvsIS Of causation that political sci-
establlShed denlOCraCleSりWhy do communlSt eCOnOmleS not grow more qulCkl)′ than
entlStS frequently engage ln.
thev do? lf we could experiment Wlth polltics ln a laboratory. as chemists or physICIStS
There lS a difference in emphasis between the two flelds, however. Historians are
do ln thelr SpeClaltleS. We COuld hold all other posslble factors constant. We could allow
more often concerned to present a slngle train Of events-a blOgraPhy ofLlnCOln, a hlS-
only the one we wished to examine to †ary and then see whether. when it varled. the
tory of negotlatlOnS at the Councll of Europe･ a milltary history Of World War IL and so
thlng We Were tr)′1ng tO eXPlaln also ヽarled For Instance. a PhysICISt may P一ace two
on-wlth causal analysュs left somewhat lmpllclt PolltlCal sclentlStS, On the other hand,
identlCal Ⅵelghts on ldentlCal wheelchalrS On Slopes of dlfferent angles and measure the
are more llkely to look for o､′erall patterns (eTnbodled ln theorleS) and less llkely to be
effect of the angle of slope on the speed of descent: slnCe nothing else varleS. lt is clear
Concerned Ⅵ′lth traclng Carefully through any slngle case or train of events.
that only dlfferlng angles of slopecan be causlnE dlfferlng Speeds of descent. lf we
This IS Only a difference of degree PolitlCal hlStOrlanS and polltlCal sclentists are en-
could manipulate thlngS ln thlS Way, We WOuld feel confident ln Stating that the one thlng
was causlng the other to vary, HoweveL Wlth rare exceptions. Ⅵe Cannot eXperlment
gaged ln the same taskltO make sense out of the myrlad polltlCal events occumng
around us-and both hlStOrlanS and political scientlStS do this by explaimng cellain
wlth the things we are examlnlng ln political sclenCe. We cannot change the electoral
things, Showlng that they are caused by other thlngS.
system of the Unlted States to see llhat effect this WOuld have on the number ofpartleS
 APPENDIX PRINCIPLES OF POLmCALANALYSIS 425

Remember from our earlier dlSCuSS10n that lt is not enoughto show that one thlng hap-
pened before another･ Tf we are to treat the earller event aS Causing the later one, We must
also establish some basIS for treating lt aS havlng brought the other about or having pro-
duced lt･ ThiL…eCeSSIOl holds as much for the hlStOrian cLSfor the political sctenttst
ThlS is an important polnt for students ln political sclenee COurSeS. because as you are
asslgned research papers to wnte, a deceptlVely slmple route may appear to be a paper
thaHraces the history Of something: a hlStOry Of the arms race between the Soviet Union
and the Unlted States, a blOgraPhy of Senator Jesse Helms, a history Of the diplomacy
leadlng up tO the Bosnia peace accords, a descnptlOn Of how the NatlOnal Secunty
Council developed･ a tracing Of changes in French flSCal policy after the soclal1StS Came
to power･ and so on･ Any of these could make an excellent topic for a paper. but lfyou
do ltright, lt Wlll be neither easier nor more dlfflCultthanany other topic WOuld be. To
do the job nght lS tO try tO eStabllSh causal relatlOnShips among the events as they tran-
splre If･ in attemptlng tO Wrlte a Paper Of thlS sort. you lay out the events-first X hap-
"natural rights:'rlghts so basic tO the nature of humanity that they take pr10rltyover all
else The Declaration of Independence appeals to hcertaln lnallenable rights, lamong
whlCh are] life, 11berty･ and the pursult Of happlneSS" and argues that because the king of
England had violated these rlghts. his rule was outla､∼; henee･ lt Was Proper tO rise in
revolution agalnSt hlm･ At a later penod. admlnlStratOrS ln Hitlerls Germany were
charged wlth the crlme Of hal,lng Obeyed and enforced Hltlerts laws. This was a crlrne
because the laws themsel､ es were ln ､ 101atlOn Of natura一 rlghts･ Basle PrlVaCy･ the rlght
of a woman to control her own body. and the fetus-s right to llfe are otherthings that
have been defended at one tlme Or another as natural nghts･
ThlS sort Of argument comes readllv to us- and we sllP eaSlly Into it･ It lS a useful
rhetorlCal device. We should realize. however. When Ⅵ′e assell the exIStenee Of r)atural
rlghts. that unless we accompany thlS assertion with an analysIS Ofhuman nature, we are
begglng the quest10m ln the followlng Way･ ･'X shou一d be defended because it lS a nat-
ural rlght.'■ What makes lt a natura一 rlght? That lt lS basIC tO the nature of a human be_

pened, then Y･ then Z-you wlll have merely described things･Asnoted, you wlll not 1ng･ But how do we know what lS basIC tO the nature ofa human belng'
have an lntereStlng PaPer･ However, if you operate as good hlStOrlanS do-that is･ if you
try to explain why the train Of events occurred as lt did-you wlll have an Interesting
2 CircularArgument･ A Circular argument lS One in whlCh a person proves A
and not necessarily easlly written paper･
from B･ but we know that B IS true Only because ofA･ Tn other words, B lmPlies A, but
､､'e believe B only lf ､､e first belleVe A･ The argument goes in a clrele and does not of-
fer any new reason to belleVe eltherAor B
A FEW COMMON PITFALLS 】N ANALYSIS
Suppose･ for example, We argued that polltlCal lnfluence of the mllitary lS a major
Asyou analyze politics, you must think stralght･ For the most part, common sense will cause of the size Of defense budgets, but we measured ･･rnllltary influencen by the size
ca汀y you Well; and practlCe and crltlCISm from your readers wlll help to sharpen your
of the armed forcesl ln thlS Case, We would be assertlng that mllltary influence is what
abilltleS As an Introductory help. you may find lt useful to conslder three corrunonflaws
causes defense budgets to be large, but because our measure of "mllltary influence" lS
ln analysis that you should watch out for in your own writing and the work of others
something that lS a dlreCt result of the size Of defense budgets, flndlng that the two
thlngS tend to rlSe and fall together Would give us no new reason to belleVe the orlglnal
1 BeggL'ng the Question･ Sometimes writers answer a question with an answerthat
statement.
restates the question･ It looks as though it has answered the questlOn, but it has not･ It

≡≡
has turned the quest10n into another form and does not produce much progress･ This is
Dllbert By Scott Adams
called begging the question.
For example, a person amalyzlng the victory of North Vletnam in the Vietnam War
might state that North Vletnam WOn because lt Was more powerful than South Vletnam･
This does not really answer the question we want to see addressed; rather, lt Changes it
sllghtly into the question Why was North Vietnam more powerful than South vietnam?
Slmllarly, an analysュs OfAmerlCan VOtlng behavlOr COnCludlng that people vote for can-

dldatesthey prefer would not seem to have brought us forward･ It would leave uswith
the further quest10n: Why do people prefer certain candldates over others? Quest10nS Of
value can also be begged･ For Instance, a Paper arguing that social1Sm is a better system
than capltalism because it lS more Just-unless lt expanded on血s to show what was

meant by "justice"-would leave us wlth the question What makes socialism moreJuSt (DILBERT rep｢lnted by permlSSIOn Of Unlted Feature Syndrcate lnc )

than capitalism?
These examples may have seemed rather simple･ and you may have wondered why
3 Post Hoc ExptalZafion･ A post hoe explanation lS the ･'Monday-mornlng quar-
you would need to be cautlOned to watch out for a flaw that lS SO easily avoided･ How- terbackH of explanatlOn lt consIStS Of taking a set or things that have already happened,
ever, begglng a queStlOn lS actually easy to do･ Not all instances of it are as obvlOuS aS
showlng that one of them plauslblv could have resulted from the others and, on the ba-
the examples used here･ For instance, people often argue about policy on the basIS Of
sュs OfthlS･ aSSert】ng that those others arc a cause of the thing ln queStlOn･
 †エU Fl｢｢ENUl^ rJHINur'Lヒt, U｢ PULJTICALANALYSIS

For example, many commentators have looked at the sequence of events leading uP
GLOSSARY
to World War II and have asserted that lt WaSthe appeasement ofBrltaln and France that
led Hitler on and resulted ln his frantic war of conquest･ This is certainly plauslble, but
lt is post hoc
The danger ln POST hoe explanations IS that for an/v event, there will be some set of
thlngS that happened at more or less the same tlme and that may look llke a plauslble ex-

planation for lt･ If those same things happen again ln the future, they may or may not
produce that same result･ It lS not that a post hoc explanation is wrong but that lt leaves
us wlth a greater feellng Of certainty than we should have. We confuse the set of events
that rlrSt Suggested an idea to us wlth venrlCation of the Idea What has suggested that
appeasement encourages aggressors? The events leadlng tO World War II How do we
know that lt's true? Look at Hitler!
The three problems of argument noted are by no means the only ones you will learn
to watch for, but they are three common problems･ ln the end, these three, and the rest, Followlng each term, the first Page On Which it is Introduced substantively appears ln

boll down to a matter of common sense･ If you are endowed with some of that, you
ofcommnn qF.n｡P Tf､,," trm pn,i,W,a,1.,,1+I. ,(…〈 ((.L〈⊥ _ _ parentheses A few items have no such reference; these are terms such as welfare state
won't go wrong･ that are not expllCltly introduced ln thlS book but belong m a glossary for readers of the
book.

KEY TERMS agents of socialization (p･ 170) Those who carry out polltical soclalization: parents,
falslfiablllty schools, media. frlendship groups･ etc The Impact Of an agent of sociallZatlOn On
begging a questlOn
tautology circular argument
one'S politleal knowledge and vleWPOints IS afunctlOn Of (a) the agent,s relevance to
CauSatlOn polltics, and (b) the agent's credlbillty.
po-i hoc explanation
trivlal explanation ambassador (p･ 404) An ofrleial charged by his or her state to conduct hlghllevel poll
ltlCS Withanother state to whlCh he or she lS pOSted･
American conservatism (p･ 21) The rather loose ldeologyknown ln the Unlted States
as "eonservatlSm･" It is really a vanant of the more general ideology of liberalism
and has re一atively llttle to do wlth the more general ideology of conservatism; there-

fore, it has been distinguished in thlS I"Ok by the name AmerTCat"OnSerVatism.

AmerlCan COnSerVatlSm lS Particularly suspicious of governmental Intervention to
make people more equal but lS Often willlng tO entrust gOVemment wlth power to
maintain morallty･
American liberalism (p･ 21) The rather loose ideology known ln the United States ｡S
"liberalisrn･" It lS Only a variant of the more general ideology of llberalism; therefore,

it has been dlStingulShed in thlS book by the name Ame7･lCan lTberallSm. American
liberallSm lS Particularly eoneerned to makepeople equal, and lt is relatlVelywilling
to entrust govemment wl山power to bnng this about･ it lS also particularly concerned

to malntain freedom of expresslOn･

arbitrary action (p･ 135) ActlOn that js taken capnciously･ The people affected do not
know what to expect before the action and do not learnafterward the grounds on
whlCh the actlOn Was Chosen.
authority (p･ 155) Power based on a general agreement thatthe holder of the power
has theright to issue certain commands and that those commands should be obeyed･
autocracy (p･ 185) A governmentalarrangement ln Which those who hold power did
not galn power by any regular constitut10nal process and are not responsible ln their
exerelSe Of power to any formal set of rules,