Almond, 1966

Political Theory and Political Science
Author(s): Gabriel A. Almond

Source: The American Political Science Review, Vol. 60, No. 4 (Dec., 1966), pp. 869-879
Published by: American Political Science Association
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1953762
Accessed: 25-07-2018 23:36 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The American Political Science Review
This content downloaded from 200.97.111.74 on Wed, 25 Jul 2018 23:36:43 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The American
Political Science Review
VOL. LX DECEMBER, 1966 NO. 4
POLITICAL THEORY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE*

GABRIEL A. ALMOND
Stanford University
Like Rachel, Jacob's beloved but still child- Let me first develop my theme by the back
less bride, who asked herself and the Lord each door, so to speak, through some comments on
morning, "Am I?," or "Can I?," so presidents the sociology of political science, arguing that
of this Association on these annual occasions we are becoming a science by inference from
intermittently ask, "Are we a science?," or changes in the magnitude, structure, age dis-
"Can we become one?" My predecessor, David tribution, and intellectual environment of the
Truman, raised this question last September political science profession. Up to the time of
applying some of the notions of Thomas Kuhn the founding of the American Political Science
in his recent book on scientific revolutions.' I Association, and going all the way back more
shall be following in Truman's footsteps, re- than two millennia to Plato, the total number of
peating much that he said but viewing the political philosophers and theorists who had
development of the profession from a some- contributed to systematic speculation about
what different perspective and intellectual his- and study of politics did not exceed a few hun-
tory. My comments will be organized around dred. In 1903 the fledgling American Political
three assertions. Science Association numbered a little over
First, there was a coherent theoretical for- 200 members. In 1934 there were 1,800 mem-
mulation in the American political theory of bers of the Association; in 1944, 3,200; in 1954,
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. 6,000; and in 1966, 15,000. The expectation is
Second, the development of professional that the membership will exceed 20,000 in the
political science in the United States from the1970's. Our Washington office assures us that
turn of the century until well into the 1950'swe are the most rapidly growing discipline in
was carried on largely in terms of this paradigm, the social sciences.
to use Kuhn's term. The most significant and This extraordinary rate of growth is associ-
characteristic theoretical speculation and re- ated with the rate of growth of American higher
search during these decades produced anomal- education; the expansion of faculties, and the
ous findings which cumulatively shook its increasing division of labor which is resulting
validity. in separate departments of political science
Third, in the last decade or two the elements in existing universities and colleges or in new
of a new, more surely scientific paradigm seem departments in newly founded institutions.
to be manifesting themselves rapidly. The core This growth of the political science profession
concept of this new approach is that of the is primarily an American phenomenon. Eng-
political system. land has a few hundred members in its Polit-
ical Studies Association. Japan has a few hun-
* Presidential address delivered at the Annual dred political scientists. There are a few hun-
Meeting of the American Political Science Asso- dred more on the European continent and in
ciation, New York City, September 8, 1966. Asia, Africa, and Latin America. But nine out
1 David B. Truman, "Disillusion and Regener- of every ten political scientists in the world to-
ation: The Quest for a Discipline," this REvIEw, day are American, and probably two out of
59 (December, 1965), 865-873; Thomas Kuhn, every three political scientists who have ever
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: lived are alive and practicing today. Though
University of Chicago Press, 1965). American preponderance is very great indeed,
869
870 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW
growth is occurring outside the United States quiry-primarily Mediterranean and Europeali
as well. In Europe and elsewhere there is a in their origins-political science as a profes-
noticeable shift from the single chair in the sion, with specialization of interests, substantial
theory of the state, or political philosophy, to research support, emphasis on systematic
the American plan with a departmental divi- field research, and rigorous logical methods, is
sion of labor similar to ours. relatively new, and at the present time is al-
These figures on the rate of growth of the most entirely American.
profession make it clear that the professional If it is at the present time a predominantly
accent is on youth Thus the eight or nine American discipline, then we must particularly
thousand new members who joined the As- concern ourselves with political theory in
sociation between 1954 and 1966 must have America on the eve of the development of pol-
created quite a bulge of young men in their itical science as a specialized discipline. The
thirties; and the anticipated growth in the paradigm of American political theory in the
profession in the next decade will probably in- nineteenth century consisted of the doctrines
crease this proportion of young men. I have of separation of power, checks and balances,
been given to understand that a similar bulge and the mixed constitution-theories of diverse
in the proportion of young men in the popula- origins, which had been combined in American
tion as a whole has some connection with the political and constitutional thought into a co-
increased crime rate. It should not surprise us herent and relatively explicit empirical and
that this increased proportion of younger men normative theory of politics.
should be associated with departure from norm Let me briefly recount the historical back-
and tradition in political science. ground of this theory. Or better, let me present
Furthermore, the growth of departments of a swift sketch of these developments in the
I)olitical science at a rate exceeding the capac- hope that my mistakes and oversimplifications
ity of our graduate schools to produce Ph.D.'s may challenge more competent political theo-
means that these young men are scarce, are in rists to do this essential job of relating contem-
a seller's market, and are being promoted porary notions to earlier concepts and formula-
rapidly, and becoming department chairmen tions. From Plato and Aristotle, through
and otherwise influential in the affairs of the Polybius and Cicero, Aquinas and others, there
profession. There are two aspects of this chang- had been developed a partly differentiated
ing age distribution which call for comment. theory or categorization of political activities
First, young men are intellectually and pro- or functions. Thus in his discussions of the Laws
fessionally more innovative than older men. and in his references to historic political sys-
And second, younger men are more likely to tems, Plato refers to different ways in which
have been trained in the newer approaches to political activities such as choosing magistrates
political science and more effectively exposed and legislators, proposing and ratifying laws,
to the intellectual currents of the times. administering laws and justice may be assigned
This brings me to my third point regarding to particular institutions such as a popular as-
the growth of the field. It is taking place in the sembly, a council, and a magistracy.2 Aristotle
age of the scientific revolution-indeed, it is an deals with the consequences of differing pat-
integral part of this revolution. There is hardly terns of distribution of activities among
a maj or center of graduate training in the agencies for the form of the polity, and for its
United States where scientific methods have normative qualities. But neither Plato nor
not been accepted, or are in process of being Aristotle systematically separates structure
accepted, and where the components of the from function. Aristotle proposed a threefold
scientific approach are not acknowledged to categorization of powers of government-the
be important parts of graduate training. The deliberative, magistrative, and judicial. But it
use of quantitative methods, the use of the new is obvious that in Aristotle these functions are
research technology, sample surveys, rigorous not analytically separated from structures. It
logical methods, sociological, psychological, is true that he defines the deliberative power by
and anthropological theory, large-scale research its activities, assigning to it sovereignty on the
undertakings, research grants, team research, issues of war, peace, and alliances, sovereignty
surely are here to stay. An increasing propor- in the enactment of laws, the control of the
tion of the newer generation of political sci- death penalty, and the appointment of mag-
entists has this kind of training, and this pro- istrates. But he speaks of the magistrative power
portion will continue to grow. Indeed, we might
argue the case that while political philosophy 2 Plato, The Laws, trans. B. Jowett (New York:
and political analysis are ancient fields of in- Random House, 1937), Book VI.
POTITICAL THEORY AND POLITICAL SCTENCE 871
sical concepts of mixed constitution (i.e., mix-

as consisting of the elected officials of the state
and of the judicial power as being expressed in ing of social status groups in the political
the system of law courts.3 system) and checks and balances (i.e., the
Actually, classical political theory is more a checking and balancing of the powers of social
political sociology and psychology and a nor- classes in the political system) were assimilated
'native political theory than it is a theory into a specifically political theory of separation
of the
political process. What goes on inside theof powers and checks and balances.
black
box of the political system and its consequences This development of political theory was
are inferred from the ways in which the social brought about by British constitutional ex-
structure is represented in it. The Platonic, perience as interpreted by such theorists as
Aristotelian and later Roman classifications of Harrington, Lilburne, and Locke' and later by
types of political systems are far more explicit Mlontesquieu, who introduced the familiar
on the consequences of varieties of social strat- threefold separation-of-powers conception.
ification and their representation in political Struggle for an independent judiciary and over
systems for their forms and their performance, the legislative power of Parliament in the
than they are regarding the varieties of polit- period from the fifteenth century to the eigh-
ical decision-making processes. The bases of teenth suggested such a functional, analytical,
political classification are sociological rather treatment
thanof the political process. It was jus-
political, depending on whether a monarchy, tified onangrounds of efficiency, government in
aristocracy, or the people predominate, or the common interest, the rule of law, and sta-
some combination of these three elements, bility. In Montesquieu6 separation of powers
or two of them. (This tendency is most marked rather than the representation of status groups
in Aristotle who distinguishes four types of in the political system becomes the basis of
oligarchy and five types of democracy associ- political classification. Though he does not
ated with different socio-economic stratifica- reject the Platonic and Aristotelian monarchic,
tion patterns.)4 These three socio-political types aristocratic, and democratic categories, he in-
are again divided normatively according to troduces a new classification based on different
whether they govern in the interests of the ways of organizing the executive, legislative,
ruling group or of the whole. The Greek and and judicial functions. Monarchies are differ-
Roman theory of political development is a entiated from despotisms through the separa-
social-psychological theory, treating the pure tion of judicial power from the legislative and
forms of rule as inherently unstable because of the executive. And republics are separated from
their susceptibility to corruption stemming monarchies and despotisms by the separation
from sociological and psychological processes. of legislative from executive power.
Hence, the Greek and Roman theorists are MIontesquieu does not reject the political
advocates of the "mixed constitution" which, sociology of the Greek and Roman theorists.
while lacking the structural simplicity of "law- The notions of mixed constitution and checks
ful" monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, and balances are used in his partly erroneous
has the virtue of optimizing the values of sta- treatment of the British constitution, where a
bility, virtue, and liberty. social status system consisting of a royal
Greek and Roman political theory stressed family, an aristocracy, and a commons have
the interrelations of social stratification with special access to governmental powers and
the political system as the basis of political means of protecting this access from invasion
classification and political change, leaving the by other social groupings. Nevertheless, the
internal operations of the political process in a seventeenth and eighteenth century theorists
relatively unelaborated form. The British po-
litical theorists of the seventeenth and eigh- 5 James Harrington, The Commonwealth of
teenth centuries focused more sharply on the Oceana (1656) (New York: G. Routledge & Sons,
political system itself, emphasizing the inter- 1887); see John Lilburne and the Levellers in The
nal division of functions and powers. The clas- Leveller Tracts, edited by William Haller and God-
frey Davies (New York: Columbia University
3Aristotle, The Politics, trans. Ernest Barker Press, 1944); John Locke, Second Treatise on Civil
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1962). See Government in Social Contract (New York: Oxford
Book IV: Chapter XIV on the deliberative power; University Press, 1962), especially chapters XI-
Chapter XV on magistrates; Chapter XVI on the XIV.
judicial power. 6 Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, trans.
4 Aristotle, op. cit., Book IV: Chapter IV on Thomas Nugent (New York: Hafner Publishing
democracy; Chapter V on oligarchy. Company, 1949). Book XI, also IT, V, VI.
moved toward a more analytically sophisti- writers of the Federalist Papers could benefit
cated theory in two respects. They came closer from a period of experimentation in constitu-
to making an analytical separation between tion-making and from the informed and often
social structure and political process, and in analytically elegant debates of the Constitu-
their theory of the political process they came tional Convention. The explanatory power of
closer to separating structure from function. their theories was an intoxicating experience.
The writers of The Federalist Papers go far- Perhaps I go too far when I suggest that the
ther in analytical sophistication. The British contemporary renascence of creative political
theorists and Montesquieu, reflecting British theory is again associated with a period of
constitutional experience with the separation experimentation in constitution-making and
of a judicial function and a legislative function nation building, this time on a world scale in
from the powers of the crown and the feudal the explosions into nationhood of the last de-
magnates, tend to treat the executive function cades. And again, we have a generation of po-
residually. Hamilton and Madison, on the other litical theorists searching for an explanatory,
hand, viewing these concepts from the perspec- predictive, and manipulative political theory.
tive of American political and constitutional But I shall return to this theme at a later point.
experience, and particularly from the point of It is in the formulation of the Federalist Pa-
view of the experiments in the state constitu- pers, then, and in the early commentaries on
tions under the Articles of Confederation with the American Constitution, that we first get a
powerful legislative bodies and weak execu- clear-cut and explicit functional theory of
tives, were forced to think more explicitly separation of powers. Each power is positively
about the relations between the legislative and defined, as generic aspects of political systems.
the executive functions. Thus, the theory of Varieties of political systems are classified ac-
separation of powers as formulated in the Fed- cording to the ways in which these functions
eralist is more of a systemic-equilibrium con- are allocated among political institutions.
cept than that elaborated in Locke and Mon- Tyrannies combine the legislative, executive,
tesquieu. If we think of some of our contem- and judicial functions in a single institution or
porary, behaviorally oriented systems theorists structure. The early political systems of the
as arrogant, it is instructive to read once again states are treated as unstable republican sys-
the remarks of the thirty-year-old Hamilton in tems because they fail to separate the three
Federalist No. 1. functions effectively. The legislative function
is inherently dominant; and true balance and
It has frequently been remarked, that, it seems
separation can only be maintained by checks
to have been reserved to the people of this coun-
and balances, by some mixture of functions
try, to decide by their conduct and example, the
among the structures, by according some leg-
important question, whether Societies of men are
islative power to the executive and courts,
really capable or not, of establishing good govern-
some executive power to the legislative, and so
ment from reflection and choice, or whether they
forth. A political system with separation of
are forever destined to depend, for their political
constitutions on accident and force....
power, duly checked and balanced to main-
tain the separation, is in a state of internal
And in Federalist No. 9 he observes, equilibrium, and is in a state of equilibrium
with the other components of the general
The science of politics, however, like most other
society, the individual, the family, the com-
sciences, has received great improvement....
munity, religious groups, and the economy.
The regular distribution of power into distinct de-
Separation of powers with checks and balances
partments, the introduction of legislative bal-
maintains a stable social order, combining jus-
ances and checks; the institution of courts com-
tice with liberty and equality.8
posed of judges holding their offices during good
Mixed-constitution doctrine still appears in
behavior; the representation of the people in the
an attenuated form in the Federalist Papers.
legislature by deputies of their own election;
But it must be remembered that for most of
these are either wholly new discoveries, or have
the earlier theorists the mixed constitution
made their principal progress towards perfection
doctrine implied a balancing of estates-mon-
in modern times.7
archy, aristocracy and clerical hierarchy, and
This confidence was in part the product of commons. The early American republic had no
general "Enlightenment optimism" and in part estates. It had holders of different amounts and
the special consequence of the fact that the
8 Ibid. See Nos. 9-10 on factions, No. 47 on
7 The Federalist, Beloff edition (Oxford: Black- separation of powers, No. 51 on checks and bal-
well, 1948), No. 1, and No. 9. ances.
POLITICAL THEORY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE 873
forms of property and the propertyless. Separa- theory of the political process.'5 All of them
tion of powers and checks and balances pro- rejected formalism, whether legal or ideological,
vided for access for these economic interest in favor of a study of the facts-real operations,
groups to the various functions in the political performance, behavior.
process. An indirectly elected executive and Thus, on the eve of the emergence of Amer-
senate, a popu ar legislative assembly, an ap- ican political science as a large-scale, empir-
pointive judiciary, different electorates for ically oriented discipline there was considerable
different agencies, connected the specifically theoretical ferment. But while the separation-
political theory of separation of powers with of-powers theory was under attack, the two
the less differentiated political-sociological more elaborate efforts at proposing alternative
theory of the classical writers.9 general theories of the political process-those
These propositions became the dominant of Goodnow and Bentley-had surprisingly
American political theory of the first half of little resonance at the level of general theory.
the nineteenth century. There was of course a There was no general theoretical polemic at
political-constitutional polemic. But the early this time, but rather a strong anti-theoretical,
American Jacobins, Jeffersonians, and Jack- empirical movement which gathered momen-
sonians challenged the specifics; they did not tum after World War I, questioning in an ad
themselves propose alternative general theories hoc way the whole separation-of-powers
of politics. The validity of the threefold scheme scheme-the threefold division of functions, the
is taken for granted, and the virtues of some association of particular functions with partic-
version of separation and checks are acknow- ular structures, and the assumptions of the
ledged. normative consequences of separation of
But in the latter part of the nineteenth cen- powers.
tury, as professional university-based political Several scholarly generations of empiricists
science began to develop, almost with its first and "middle range" theorists followed in the
breath so to speak, questions were raised as to wake of these "turn of the century" theorists,
the validity of the theory in its whole and in its pointing to a division of functions among gov-
parts. Woodrow Wilson,'" A. Lawrence Lo- ernmental agencies quite different from the
well," Frank Goodnow,'2 among others, pressed classic conception of separation of powers. The
for a sharper analytic distinction between judiciary was shown to be a significant law-
structure and function, striving to free empir- maker; executives were demonstrated to be
ical political science from the earlier assump- the primary legislative agencies; administra-
tions of necessary relations between them. tive agencies were represented as being legis-
Wilson and Goodnow explicitly rejected the lators and adjudicators; and legislative bodies
threefold distinction in favor of a twofold one were pictured as modifiers, legitimators, ag-
between politics and administration.'3 A. gregators, and not as legislators at all. And
Lawrence Lowell tried to find a legitimate place yet while they rejected separation-of-powers
for the bargaining function of the party pol- concepts, they were still prisoners of the theory,
itician in the theory of the political process,'4 reflected by efforts to reconcile these anomalies
while Arthur Bentley rejected structural-func- at least with the nomenclature of separation
tional theory in favor of an interest-group of powers. Thus the legislative and adjudicative
powers of administrative agencies were referred
9 Ibid. See Nos. 52-53 on the House of Repre- to as quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial.
sentatives, Nos. 62-63 on the Senate, Nos. 67 -77 Similarly other scholars in the period
on the Executive, Nos. 78-83 on the Judiciary. roughly from World War I on into the present
10 Woodrow Wilson, The State (Boston: D. C. challenged separation-of-powers theory as an
Heath, 1898), Chapter III. inadequate categorization of the political pro-
11 A. Lawrence Lowell, "The Physiology of cess. Thus the students of political parties,
Politics," this REVIEW, 4 (February, 1910), 1-15. following Lowell's insight, developed a theory
12 Frank J. Goodnow, Politics and Administra- of the party and the politician as a system of
tion (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1900), brokerage, bargaining, aggregation. But there
Chapter I. is no place in separation of powers theory for
13 Woodrow Wilson, "The Study of Adminis- a brokerage or bargaining function. It was'
tration," Political Science Quarterly, 2 (June, reconciled as a function which could impart
1887), 197-222; Frank J. Goodnow, op. cit., coherence to a separation-of-powers, checks-
Chapter I.
14 A. Lawrence Lowell, Public Opinion and
Popular Government (New York: David McKay 15 Arthur F. Bentley, The Process of Government
Company, 1914), pp. 61-64. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1908).
and-balances, and federal system."6 Students of Marx, Michels, and Pareto, they founded no
pressure groups and the lobby in their search schools of political theory in America. There
for theoretical legitimation spoke of the lobby was a certain uneasiness, even guilt feeling,
and pressure groups as a "third chamber of the among these empirical iconoclasts. Students of
legislature."'7 And finally students of the media Merriam will recall that he brooded now and
of communication, in similar efforts to fit these then about the unwritten Allgemeine Staat-
institutions into the political process resorted slehre which he had in his bones. And an earlier
to such strained analogies as "America's House generation of students of public administration
of Lords," or "the fourth branch of govern- will recall the search for "principles."'9
ment.""8 There was indeed a certain uneasiness about
The ethical justification of separation-of- this atheoretic orientation. It was in part the
powers theory also came in for attack. The consequence of a cumulative sense of the in-
assumption that separation of powers was not adequacy of the theory of separation of powers
only a natural and efficient organization of the as a scheme for dealing with political reality
political process, but a sure guarantor of the and in part a nostalgia for the great tradition
preservation of order and liberty, was chal- of political theory which dealt with first prin-
lenged by those who questioned the identifica- ciples. What general theory we had was at-
tion of liberty with a governmental system tenuating, and to all intents and purposes
with limited powers to legislate for mass wel- creative political theorizing as a discipline had
fare, a governmental system that provided ceased to exist on any significant scale. And
institutionally for oligarchic interests. A grop- this condition could continue as long as one
ing began here to make a sharper analytic component of the original theory survived.
separation between empirical and normative This was the Enlightenment faith in the irre-
propositions and to subject assertions about versibility of the relation between the spread
the ethical consequences of structural-func- of knowledge and education and the diffusion
tional arrangements to empirical examination. of the rule of law, popular participation in the
But even in this area there was no principled political process, and government by intelli-
effort to replace separation of powers with gent deliberation-in other words, some ver-
another general theory. While there were pop- sion of the separation-of-powers system. This
ulistic political theorists who favored direct was the final anomaly, the final disconfirma-
legislation and simple majority rule, and other tion, the disproof of prediction at the hands of
political theorists who were influenced by history which turned us back to theory again.
Half a century or more ago the universe of
16 See inter al. E. Pendleton Herring, The political systems as seen by Anglo-American
Politics of Democracy (New York: Holt, Rinehart political philosophers and theorists had a
and Winston, 1940); E. E. Schattschneider, hierarchic structure. At the peak were the
Party Government (New York: Holt, Rinehart Anglo-American systems representing man's
and Winston, 1942). See also Herman Finer, highest attainment of the Enlightenment ideals
Theory and Practice of Modern Government (New of reason, liberty, justice, and equality. Other
York: Henry Holt, 1949), Chapters VI and VII systems were viewed according to their dis-
for a critique of separation-of-powers theory in tance from or proximity to these morally and
terms to those developed here. historically leading systems. These systems
17 E. Pendleton Herring, Group Representation were the primary objects of study, since the
before Congress (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, historical process was moving in these direc-
1929), p. 18; Harwood L. Childs, Labor and Capital tions. The relationship between the Enlighten-
in National Politics (Columbus: Ohio State Uni- inent faith and the empirical iconoclastic ap-
versity Press, 1930); Peter H. Odegard and proach is beautifully illustrated in the work of
E. Allen Helms, A merican Politics (New York: Charles Merriam, who perhaps more than any
Harper and Brothers, 1938), p. 753. other American political scientist of his genera-
18 See inter al. Harold L. Ickes, America's House tion shook the validity of various elements of
of Lords: An Inquiry into the Freedom of the Press separation-of-powers theory. With an Enlight-
(New York: Harcourt Brace, 1939); Douglas enment faith as strong as his one could break
Cater, The Fourth Branch of Government (Boston: idol after idol of the separation-of-powers
Houghton Mifflin, 1959). For an analytical dis-
cussion of the function of the press in the process 19 L. D. White, Introduction to Public Adminis-
of policy making and citations of the literature tration (New York: The Macmillan Company,
see Bernard C. Cohen, The Press and Foreign 1926); see particularly the third edition (1948)
Policy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, for a discussion of principles of public administra-
1963), pp. 31 ff. tion.
scheme and still get along without an alterna- of parties, pressure groups, and communica-
tive general theory of politics. This became tion, were operating with process and func-
increasingly difficult for his students who not tional concepts which were the direct ancestors
only saw a new world of political reality com- of contemporary system and functional con-
ing, but had to inhabit it, make some intellec- cepts. The relationship is quite clear. The con-
tual order and meaning out of it. It became cept of process, as Easton points out, preceded
difficult to believe simply in the idea of pro- that of system. The one may be said to have
gress in a world in which fascism could capture led to the other.21
strongholds in Western culture. It became The introduction of the system concept
painfully difficult to think of communism as a represents a genuinely important step in the
historical digression, as it seized power in direction of science. It is a step comparable in
Russia, moved into Eastern Europe and China, significance to the ones taken in Enlighten-
and threatened Western Europe. It became ment political theory over the earlier classic
intellectually impossible to accept either a formulations, comparable in significance to the
separation-of-powers approach or a predom- analytical-empirical achievements of the polit-
inantly empirical approach in the analysis of ical process movement in American political
the unstable phenomena of the new nations of science in the first half of the twentieth cen-
the post-World War II period. tury. Taking place in the era of the scientific
Thus far we have described a sequence much revolution it represents a surer thrust into the
like that presented by Thomas Kuhn in his culture of modern science. This may be a pre-
theory of scientific revolutions.20 If it does not mature account of its intellectual origins, but
quite fit his model, then we must remember surely Merriam's prophetic New Aspects of
that the social sciences may have a dialectic Politics,22 Lasswell's brilliant early analysis of
somewhat different from the physical and bi- "the state as a manifold of events,"23 and the
ological sciences. At any rate, we begin with a generalization of the concept of process and of
dominant paradigm, a formulation of the sub- interaction in the work of Herring, Schattsch-
ject matter of political analysis, specifying neider, Odegard, and Key in their studies of the
variables, parameters, their relations and con- interrelations of interest groups, political
sequences. Political science as normal science, parties, bureaucracy, and executives illumi-
as a professional discipline in America, begins nated a new horizon in political science. If
with problems suggested by this theory, turn- these scholars spied out the land, then we might
ing up anomalous finding after anomalous find- say that men such as Truman, Easton, Dahl,
ing which are reconciled with strained formula- Deutsch,24 and others have been moving across
tions such as quasi-legislative and quasi-jud- the Jordan to possess it.
icial functions, third chambers, fourth estates, A new paradigm is surely developing in po-
or fourth branches of government. The final litical science. Its first formulations are crude,
anomaly-the disproof of Enlightenment-his- partial, and often pretentious. But theory
torical predictions-breaks the back of the formulation will undoubtedly go forward with
traditional conceptual scheme and an era of
theoretical speculation, of new candidates for 21 David Easton, The Political System (New
paradigms begins. York: Alfred Knopf, 1953), pp. 96 if. and 160 if.
I cannot escape a certain uneasiness about 22 Charles E. Merriam, New Aspects of Politics
Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions. I have (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1925).
the impression that in the interest of making 23 Harold D. Lasswell, Psychopathology and
his point about the discontinuous aspect of Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
scientific growth, he understates the element 1930), Chapter XIII.
of continuity, of cumulativeness. Normal sci- 24 See David Truman, The Governmental Process
ence is treated as somewhat more orthodox (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1951); David Easton,
than may often be the case. And the discon- op. cit. and A Systems Analysis of Political Life
tinuities may be treated as more innovative. (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965); Robert A.
At any rate in the development of political Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale Univer-
science in America, the generation of empirical sity Press, 1961) and Modern Political Analysis
researchers who turned up the anomalies, had (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1963); Karl W.
been preceded by more speculative theorists Deutsch, The Nerves of Government (New York:
who argued that the anomalies would be there The Free Press of Glencoe, 1963) and "Social
if we looked. And the empirical students of leg- Mobilization and Political Development," this
islative, administrative, and judicial processes, REVIEW, 55. (September, 1961), 493-514; V. 0.
Key, Jr., Politics, Parties, and Pressure Groups,
20 Thomas Kuhn, op. cit., Chapters III-VII. 5th. ed. (New York: Crowell and Company, 1964).
the rapid growth of the profession and with the terns which enable us to compare, explain, and
high capabilities and research opportunities of evaluate more precisely.26
an increasing proportion of its members. What 3) The emerging analytical framework in
are some of the principal features of this emerg- contemporary political theory is the concept
ing approach? of system whether it is employed at the level
1) The first is a statistical approach to the of sub-national, regional, or structural units
universe of political systems. We no longer fo- such as communities, legislative bodies or com-
cus simply on the "great powers," but are con- mittees, at the level of national political units,
cerned with sampling the total universe of or at the level of the international political
man's experiments with politics, contemporary system. The principal advantage of the system
and historical, national, sub-national, and in- concept is that it analytically differentiates the
ternational. Increasingly, we select our cases object of study from its environment, directs
for study in order to test hypotheses about the attention to the interaction of the system with
relations between variables-environmental other systems in its environment, to its own
influences on politics, political influences on the conversion characteristics, and to its main-
environment, and the interaction of political tenance and adaptive properties. In the devel-
variables with each other. The comparative opment of the political system concept, Lass-
method is used more rigorously, in a self-con- well's seven functional categories of the deci-
scious search for control, not only in cross- sion process and Easton's demand-support-
national comparisons, but in sub-national output model represent post-separation-of-
comparisons and international system com- powers efforts at postulating sets of categories
parisons as well.25 which are logically distinct and universally
2) A second significant characteristic of this applicable. The scientific approach to categor-
emerging paradigm of political science is the ization is the modest approach of the coder,
differentiation and specification of variables rather than that of the philosopher. There is
and the assumptions of probability and reflexi- constant revision of the code as it is used to
vity in their relations. Thus, in our efforts to organize data. The ease with which we can get
establish the properties of political systems, and analyze data these days gives us a
compare them with each other, and classify secular attitude toward our categories. They
them into types, we explicitly separate struc- have a short and instrumental life, and we
ture from function, structure from culture, avoid becoming their prisoners as we once
social systems from political systems, empirical were of separation-of-powers concepts.
properties from their normative implications. In this search for an adequate system of func-
We tend to view the individual political system tional categories, one thing seems to be clear.
as a universe of interactions and make case Our analytical framework has to enable us to
studies of its operations according to some relate three aspects of the functioning of polit-
sampling strategy. The result is a movement ical systems. We need functional categories in
away from black-and-white typecasting, to- order to describe and compare political sys-
ward classification based on statements of tems at the level of their performance-as sys-
probability of process and performance pat- tems interacting with other systems in their
domestic and international environments. We
25 Gabriel Almond and James Coleman, The need functional categories which will enable us
Politics of the Developing Areas (Princeton: to describe and compare political systems ac-
Princeton University Press, 1960), Conclusion; cording to their internal conversion processes.
Seymour Martin Lipset, Political Man (New And finally we need functional categories in
York: Doubleday and Co., 1960); Karl Deutsch, order to describe and compare political sys-
The Nerves of Government, op. cit. and "Social tems according to their maintenance and adap-
Mobilization and Political Development," op. cit., tive characteristics. Modern political theory
Bruce Russett, et al., World Handbook of Political will consist in good part of a logic which will
and Social Indicators (New Haven: Yale Univer- enable us to relate changes in the performance
sity Press, 1964); Arthur Banks and Robert of political systems to changes in internal pro-
Textor, A Cross Polity Survey (Cambridge: cess and conversion patterns and to changes in
M.I.T. Press, 1963); Richard Rosecrance, Action
and Reaction in World Politics (Boston: Little, 26 In this connection see Robert Dahl, op. cit.;
Brown, & Co., 1963); Heinz Eulau, "Comparative Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel P. Huntington,
Political Analysis: A Methodological Analysis," Political Power: USA/USSR (New York: Viking
Midwest Journal of Political Science, 6 (Novem- Press, 1965); and Gabriel Almond and James
ber, 1962), 397-407. Coleman, op cit., Chapter I.
recruitment and socialization patterns. An- that we can perhaps love it better as we acquire
other part of it will consist of a logic which will the perspective and illumination which system-
enable us to move from empirical relationships atic and rigorous comparison make possible.
to normative judgments. Some of the subdisciplines of political science-
4) The Enlightenment theory of progress political parties, interest groups, public opin-
toward democracy and the rule of law is giving ion and communication, bureaucracy-pre-
way to a multi-linear theory of political de- viously based almost entirely on American ex-
velopment leading us to break through the perience, are increasingly treated in system
historical and cultural parochialism of the field. terms and in a cross-national, comparative
Enlightenment theory began with the leviathan context. As the mood of the cold war changes
state and postulated as the legitimate problem from obsession to concern, Soviet and Com-
of political theory that of bringing the leviathan munism studies are becoming more systemic
under control through institutional and legal and comparative. The newest developments in
checks and balances, and through popular pro- international relations theory reflect the im-
cesses. Modern political theory has to ask how pact of system concepts and comparative
the leviathan itself comes into existence, in methods. Political theory begins to show signs
order to cope with the intellectual problems of of claiming its role as the systematizer, codifier,
understanding the political prospects and pro- hypothesis formulator, and ethical evaluator
cesses of the new nations. We are beginning to of the field as a whole.
break through the historical barrier of the It has been the great privilege of the sub-
French Revolution and the ethnic barrier of discipline of comparative politics to have acted
Western Europe, reaching into historical and as a catalyst in this process of professional de-
anthropological data for knowledge of the va- velopment. Because of the existing division of
riety of political development patterns. And we labor, comparative politics dealt with Euro-
are on the eve of a search for rational choice pean, Asian, African, and Latin American po-
theories of political growth-an approach litical systems. Leaving out as it did the Amer-
which may make political theory more relevant ican and Communist political systems in an
to public policy. Like the authors of the Fed- empirical, though not in a theoretical sense, it
eralist Papers, contemporary political theo- could avoid the pressures of ethnocentrism and
rists are inescapably confronted with the prob- the distortions of the Cold War. And, con-
lem of how resources may be economically al- fronted by the exotic and unstable phenomena
located to affect political change in preferred of the new and modernizing nations, it was
directions. The justification for this quest for uniquely challenged by the problems of com-
an allocation-of-resources theory of political parison, classification, and change, and led in
development is not only its relevance to cen- the search for analytical frameworks and
tral concerns of public policy, but its uses as a categories suitable for coping with these intel-
test of the validity and power of our theories. lectual problems. It is not accidental that it
It forces us to place our bets, set the odds, and fell to comparative politics to be particularly
confront straightforwardly the issue of the kind active in reestablishing the relationship be-
of prediction which is possible in political science. tween the analysis of individual political sys-
These developments are not matters of the tems and their classes and varieties with gen-
remote future; they are already to be observed eral political theory, and that it dramatized
in the thrust of the various sub-fields of polit- the necessity of reforging the links between
ical science. Thus, American political studies historical political theory, empirical political
are moving out of their parochial orientation theory, and normative political theory.
in the search for the illumination and increased A future historian of political science may
rigor which can be gained through cross-na- find it suggestive to compare the fate of com-
tional and sub-national comparison.27 We are parative politics with that of the Liberal Party
discovering that the American political system, of Britain which, having accustomed the Tories
no matter how much we love it, is still a polit- to competition and accommodation and having
ical system comparable to other systems and socialized the elites of the working classes into
a common bargaining culture, found that it
27 Robert Dahl, Political Opposition in Western
had put itself out of political business, so to
Democracies (New Haven: Yale University Press, speak. So the field of comparative politics pres-
1966); John C. Wahlke, et al., The Legislative sing into strange lands and experimenting
System (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1962); with exotic concepts may really have been
Robert E. Agger, et al., The Rulers and the Ruled leading political science back to the thread of
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1964). continuity in the field and putting itself out of
878 TIlE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW
business as a distinctive subdiscipline. For com- conflict may be multiplied. If Dahl was correct
parison, whether it be in the experiment, in the when he wrote the epitaph for a monument to
analysis of the results of quantitative surveys, a successful protest, then it may be that the
or in the observation of process and behavior battle of science has been won, and this may
in different contexts in the real world, is the be an appropriate moment for the victors to
very essence of the scientific method. It makes take a look back at their intellectual origins.
no sense to speak of a comparative politics in If we consider the tradition of political sci-
political science, since if it is a science, it goes ence and the place of political science in the
without saying that it is comparative in its university curriculum, it becomes quite clear
approach. And in time the significant message that, while drawing heavily upon other dis-
of comparative politics will be assimilated on the ciplines, political science is not science in gen-
one hand into political theory and on the other eral and not social science. However we define
into the analytical frameworks and method- it, we have a limited and special responsibility
ologies of the empirical studies we make for the political aspects of the social process.
whether they be in American urban areas or Our past imposes this structural restraint
legislative bodies, in Sub-Saharan Africa or in upon us; and the existence of anthropology,
the international arena. This is no small mor- sociology, law, history, philosophy, statistics,
tal span, and it is not yet complete. economics, and mathematics within the com-
These trends toward rigor and scope, system- munity of the university confronts us with an
atic exploration of the consequences for poli- inescapable problem of intellectual and institu-
tics of social and psychological variables, and tional boundaries. We are not the best judges of
the formulation of general analytical frame- psychological, sociological, mathematical, and
works represent a significant step into the statistical competence, though we are or should
modern world of science. And the rate of be the best judges of the appropriateness and
growth and professionalization of political usefulness of the application of these disci-
science give promise that the intellectual rate plines to the special field in which we have or
of growth will be correspondingly rapid. It may should have the highest competence.
very well be that there is no word of counsel, Whatever political science may become, one
of caution, which the older Turks can give to of its peculiarly important ingredients will be
the young ones, no unexplored area or ne- what it has been. And here let me argue that
glected problem in the field which this numer- we have no cause for shame in this past.
ous, talented, and highly skilled generation has Surely the dominant element in this tradition
not already anticipated or soon will encounter is our special relation to the problem of vio-
and solve more effectively than those who pre- lence and coercion in human affairs. This mis-
ceded them. sion becomes peculiarly central in the political
It may, however, be appropriate to point theory of the Enlightenment when the secular
out that the persisting bipolar conflict in the optimism of the Age of Reason led men to the
field between humanists and behavioralists conviction that this ethically dangerous-even
conceals a lively polemic within both camps normally wicked-instrumentality might be
and perhaps particularly among the so-called tamed and put to humane and constructive
behavioralists. Among the modernists neolog- work. This is no small tradition, and it is pecu-
isms burst like roman candles in the sky, and liarly ours. The Enlightenment theorists were
wars of epistemological legitimacy are fought. not only convinced that this was their mis-
The devotees of rigor and theories of the middle sion, but that it was in sure process of being ac-
range reject more speculative general theory as complished. We are less sure of the outcome of
non-knowledge; and the devotees of general this confrontation of knowledge and violence.
theory attack those with more limited scope as Mly friends will recall that I have never
technicians, as answerers in search of questions. been able to resist the temptation of quoting
In my comments this evening I have tried to Scripture, even when another book would do.
relate contemporary general theory to the I ask them to indulge me once again as I re-
great tradition. Or better, I have presented a turn to the childless Rachel seeking to remind
plea to our political theorists to do this job of the Lord of the role he had assigned her in his
forging the links between past, present, and plan for man's redemption. She resorts to a
future more effectively than I possibly can. I desperate stratagem. She gives Jacob her hand-
attach special importance to this task since maiden Bilhah as a concubine, and then acts
confusion, even loss, of identity is inevitably as midwife receiving the two boys, Dan and
associated with professional growth. And when Naphtali on her knees. It would take the com-
quantitative and qualitative growth occur at passionate and ironic fantasy of Thomas Mann
such extraordinary rates, the confusion and to interpret this stratagem of Rachel. The
POLITICAIL THEORY AND POLITICAL SCIEN(CiE Is 79
good book in its powerful and compact way for many of us in the camp of the behavioralists,
simply tells the tale, and then moves on to the the intoxication of now research technologies,
eventual birth of Rachel's Joseph, Jacob's fa- and the explanatory power of insights from
vorite son and the instrument of Israel's sal- other disciplines has obscured this mission--
vation. My own theory is that there was no our own unborn Joseph-which is passed on to
magic here, but simply a primitive form ofus inescapably by our past and imposed on us
sug-
gestion therapy as Rachel sought to overcome by our present division of labor. If this is true,
her own sterility by sharing her simple hand- or rather let me put it this way, to the extent
maiden's fertility. But the point of the tale for that this is true, we are in danger of becoming
my purposes this evening is that never, not alienated from our special professional culture
even in the extremity of her childless grief, did and from the powerful motivation which comes
Rachel confuse Bilhah's progeny with her own from having a significant part in the solution
unborn Joseph. Her mission was still before her; of the ultimate problem of man's enlighten-
her labor still undone. ment.
Yet I sometimes have the impression that

Almond, 1966

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Almond, 1966

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Political Theory and Political Science

Author(s): Gabriel A. Almond

POLITICAL THEORY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE*

sical concepts of mixed constitution (i.e., mix-

You might also like