FUNCTIONALISM AND ITS CRITICS - Intercollegiate Studies Institute

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FUNCTIONALISM AND ITS CRITICS be explained by the fact that men require mechanisms of some kind to define common goals, including mere survival, as well as to mo - bilize resources for their attainment. The key role played by the political system in any society makes it a focal point of conflict, and a mechanism by which dominant elites can insure their dominance and engage in various forms of self-aggrandizement. In the study of any given society the actual relationship between the role of demands emanating from other groups within the society and elite preferences and perceptions is an open question to be settled by research. Almond ' s liberal perspectives also weaken his discussion of political culture. It may be that secular, rational, pragmatic cuture is the high point of evolution, as it manifests (should we say manifested?) itself in England and the United States. However one must deal with some serious questions before such an assertion can be accepted. American " pragmatism " has always operated within a framework of certain widely shared values themselves derived from the Liberal tradition. The " pragmatism " of the British, while superficially the same, has other roots. Both traditions seem to be breaking down, and I suspect that Almond would have been more sensitive to this fact had he not been caught up in certain assumptions of his own. His problems with the concept of political culture as an analytic tool have, however, deeper roots which are related to his entire methodology, and the methodology of much of the contemporary behavioral school. Responding to criticisms that functional theory was static, that it ignored conflict, and that the relationship between macro-theory and actual empirical analysis was not clearly articulated, Almond has modified his approach. An evolutionary theory was added to the repertoire of functionalism and, more recently, efforts have been made to include coalition and leadership analysis. However, the model still remains static in many ways. Scholars are to search for relevant variables to describe a given society at a given point and then to look for the forces which produce change. As yet, however, one has little sense that Almond has begun to think about the weight of particular variables in producing a given change or has developed a. method for adequately describing a society at a given period of time. As a result, superficial resemblances are often assumed to represent basic similarities, and concepts like political culture become reified. Let me offer an example of what I mean and 269
270 THE POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEWER then attempt to suggest a strategy. by which efforts may be made to deal with the problem. In Comparative Politics, Almond contrasts the political style of the United States, England and the Philippines, on the one hand, with countries such as France on the other. The latter he argues, is characterized by an " absolute, value oriented " style. The former on the other hand are more pragmatic. He goes on to note: The pragmatic-bargaining style characterizes aggregation in such systems as those of the United States, Great Britain and the Philippines. In these countries a wide variety of interests are often combined into a limited number of alternative policies. This aggregation is sometimes guided by more general ideological perspectives, but the accommodation of diverse interests is its more notable characteristic. . . The presence of this style greatly facilitates system responsiveness. 83 My knowledge of the Philippines is not very detailed. I would guess that the style of politics described by Almond is based on quite different values than that of the United States or England, and has more to do with the clientelist politics so characteristic of Latin American as well as a number of Asian societies. 84 Placed in the total context of the society, the style of interest aggregation in the Philippines, therefore, would seem likely to have a quite different meaning than superficially similar styles in the U. S. and Great Britain. It has, for example, been associated with extremely low rates of economic growth and quite high levels of corruption. The latter phenomenon, at least, is not characteristic of English politics. 86 Further, while Almond ' s model helps us understand some aspects of the American malaise today, it seems clear that other forces have been at work too, associated with changing family patterns, and the decline of Protestant sensibilities of a certain kind. Relating the particular pattern of American political culture dynamically to other variables in the 1950 ' s might not have enabled Almond 83 Comparative Politics, p. 108. 84 " See John Duncan Powell, Peasant Society and Clientelist Politics," American Political Science Review 64 (June, 1970), pp. 411-425. 86 Almond is certainly aware that similar styles do not have the same meanings in all three countries, but I feel that he is unable adequately to conceptualize the differences (see Ibid., pp. 57-58). 1
Page 1 and 2: FUNCTIONALISM AND ITS CRITICS : An
Page 3 and 4: 238 THE POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEWER
Page 9 and 10: 244 THE POLITICAL SCIENCE .REVIEWER
Page 33: 268 THE POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEWER
Page 41: 276 THE POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEWER

FUNCTIONALISM AND ITS CRITICS - Intercollegiate Studies Institute

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?