Almira Ramadhania

19/438488/SP/28696
Midterm Exam

Gabriel Almond’s Comparative Political Systems Approach

In this political approach to facilitate comparison of some significant existing political

system in the present world, Almond uses the certain sociological and anthropological
concepts. Almond explains a political system as a set of interacting roles, or a structure of a
roles with structure defined as a patterning of interaction. Almond considerate the using of
‘role’ concepts in such terms like organizations, institutions, nor groups to be more
comprehensive and broader in concept.
Almond likewise recognizes four key concepts of a political framework that are
profoundly interconnected, where one fluctuates as indicated by a change in another concepts.
Those concepts are the emergence of pressure groups that produce certain changes in party
system and legislative processes, the rapid expansion of executive bureaucracy, changes in the
role of political communication, and the last one the orientation to political action.
Now discussing about the main four political classification systems which are the basic
discussion of the comparative political systems innovated by Almond. The first one are the
Anglo-American political system. The characteristics that describe this system are based on
two aspects: homogeneous, as in sharing the same political ends and means and secular as in
how the system is multi-valued in terms of bargaining, rational-calculating and experimental
political culture. Prosperity of mass, security and freedoms are being the main focus in this
system. Some characters that define the Anglo-American political system are first, how it is
highly differentiated between agencies, associations, groups, nor political parties. Second, it is
more manifested, organized, and bureaucratized. Third, how the functions in each role are
carefully characterized, and lastly how this system more likely to have a diffusion of power
and influence within the political system as a whole.
The second theory are the pre-industrial political systems. Also known as partially
industrial and westernized political system, this theory are basically the mixture between two
political cultures, the Western system with its parliament, its electoral system, its bureaucracy
and the like, and the pre-Western system or systems.
There are five factors that generated as a result from the mixture of both Western and
pre-Western system, which are the type of traditional culture that are involved, the auspices
under which Westernization has been introduced, the functions of the society which have been
Westernized, the tempo and tactics of the Westernization process, and the type of Western
cultural products which have been introduced. Leadership seen as an important third aspect in
this political system as a consequence of the conglomeration between the Western and
traditional system. As a result from these two types of system from the mixing culture, there is
a great deal of instability and unpredictability between the political structure. The last and the
most important aspect of these political systems is the mixing of political role structures.
The next theory are the Totalitarian political systems. The concept of this system is how
the political organization system is controlled from the center using communication technology
that causes this system has a homogeneous type. Due to the use of technology as a control
center in communicating also, this system can only be adapted in modern life and cannot be
used in the ancient political system. Moreover, there are at least two distinctive characteristic
of Totalitarian political systems. The first one are the predominance of the coercive roles: all
forms of organization and communication become saturated with a coercive aspect and second,
the functional instability of the power roles which includes bureaucracy, party, army, and secret
police. Its main purpose is the prevention of any stable delegation of power, and the consequent
diffusion of power and creation of other power centers.
The last theory provided by Almond are the Continental-European Political Systems.
Started with the background of the failure on the part of the middle classes in the nineteenth
century to carry through a thorough-going secularization of the political culture, the
Continental-European political system has three major political sub cultures: the pre-
industrial (primarily Catholic components), the older middle-class components, and the
industrial components. How the system organized is based on putting forward aspects of the
movement rather than focusing on political parties because of its initial form as a fragmented
political culture. The essential characteristic from this political system are the general
alienation from the political market.
Entering the discussion of what makes a transformation of a political system possible
from the position of less powerful actors, it can be discussed that a society that is not a
legislative body nor the government has a big role in a political system, it also depends on the
political system adopted by the country. The dependency that results between the government
and its people is also one of the factors why the transformation of power in a political system
makes so much sense. For example, society has a big influence especially in a country that
embraces democracy for example, where the voice of the people is the most important and the
government then collects those votes and makes regulations. The political system clearly does
not move on its own and that is why any decisions and regulations set by the government
continue to be influenced by less powerful actors.

REFERENCES

Almond, G. A. (1956). Comparative Political Systems . The Journal of Politics, Vol. 18, No.
3, 391-409.