Political Sociology Fall semester, 2012. PhD seminar (4 credits) Nádor 11 #611. Monday,15.30 – 17.10 Nádor 11. #210. Wednesday, 15.10 – 17.10 András Bozóki Professor of Political Science, CEU Office: Nádor u. 15. 5th floor, #5. Office hours: TBA. [email protected] Course description This is a doctoral seminar building on the comparative politics and political theory MA courses. Basic questions in political sociology mostly focus on the holders of power and the way power is exercised in a society. In this seminar, sociological analysis is applied to the political field, and attention is paid to social determinants and sources of political power, state formation, theories of the state, civil society, and social movements. Beyond these topics the seminar offers an overview in classic and recent theories of elites and classes with emphasis on New Class and edifferent positional and reputational elite groups (politicians, intellectuals, cultural elites). The relationship between political transformation and elite change, between current forms of globalization and the global justice movements will also be discussed, just as the structure vs agency debate. Expectations and assignments Students are expected to attend classes, to be active and prepared for the discussion of a given topic. In each meeting, an introductory presentation of the topic will be followed by student presentations and discussion. Presentation handouts will be requested, just as, occasionally, position papers. Course objectives The main aim of the course is to help students understand the social embeddedness of political processes and to familiarize them with some of the most fundamental approaches int he domain of political sociology as well with its contemporary currents. It will allow students to understand the different theoretical approaches to the study of power, state, civil society, classes, elites, and movements. The seminar program is designed in such a way that maximizes the interactions between different schools of thoughts of studying political sociology. Learning outcome During the course students enhance their capacity of critical thinking and ability to express their own opinions. They are expected to learn how to analyze and interpret political processes and political behavior from sociological perspective and , at the same time, understand the political impact on social structure, on citizens social and labor market position and their attitudes, aspirations and values. Requirements and assessments Since this is a reading seminar, students are expected to do the reading thoroughly before the class meeting for which it is assigned, and to participate actively in class meetings. The seminar is based on close reading of the texts and active participation of students to ensure a 1 lively group discussion on each topic. The seminar is designed to be highly interactive and to give students a chance to develop their oral and written ability to marshal analytical arguments concerning issues at hand. Students will be asked to give shorter presentations on selected readings in order to introduce the topic for further discussion. Presenters are required to write a short handout for others by the beginning of the class. Occasionally, short position papers will also be required. Finally, each student has to write a 12-14 pages long (1.5-spaced) paper on one of the topics discussed during the semester. The topic must be chosen and submitted for the lecturer’s approval by October 31. The final paper must be turned in the December 6 meeting. Evaluation is based 1. on the participation, activity, and the quality of presentations in seminar discussions (40 per cent), 2. on short written presentations, e.g. handouts, position papers (20 per cent), and 3. on the quality of the final paper (40 per cent). Topics and readings WEEK 1. September 17. Introduction and overview of the course Mandatory reading Reinhard Bendix , 1977 [1960] “Basic Concepts of Political Sociology,” in Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait. Berkeley: University of California Press, 285-297. Edward W. Said, 1994. Representations of the Intellectual. London: Vintage, 3-17. Optional reading Giovanni Sartori, 1969. „From the Sociology of Politics to Political Sociology” in S. M. Lipset ed. Politics and the Social Sciences. London: Oxford Univ. Press Kate Nash, 2000. Contemporary Political Sociology: Globalization, Politics, and Power, Blackwell Publishers, Malden, Mass. 1-19. Nick Crossley, 2005. Key Concepts in Critical Social Theory. Los Angeles: Sage Colin Hay, 2007. Why We Hate Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press Hans Joas & Wolfgang Knöbl, 2009. Social Theory: Twenty Introductory Lectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press September 19. Power I. Mandatory readings Max Weber 1991. „The Sociology of Charismatic Authority” in H. H. Gerth and C. W. Mills eds. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. London: Routledge, 245-262. C. Wright Mills, 1956. The Power Elite. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press, 3-29. 2 Optional readings Ralf Dahrendorf, 1976 [1957], Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Daniel Bell 1976. The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism. New York: Basic Books Pierre Bourdieu & J. C. Passeron 1977. Reproduction in Education, Society, and Culture. Beverly Hills: Sage Robert C. Tucker ed. 1978. The Marx-Engels Reader. New York: W. W. Norton Paul Rabinow ed. 1984. The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books. (Especially 32- 50, 51-75, 239-56, 373-80.) Zygmunt Bauman 1987. Legislators and Interpreters. Ithaca - New York: Cornell University Press Loic J. D. Wacquant, 1989. “Towards a Reflexive Sociology: A Workshop with Pierre Bourdieu.” Sociological Theory 7:26-63. Craig Calhoun, 1995. “Habitus, Field, and Capital: Historical Specificity in the Theory of Practice,” in Critical Social Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 132-161. WEEK 2. September 24, 26. Power II–III. Mandatory readings Nelson W. Polsby, 1960. “How to Study Community Power: The Pluralist Alternative.” Journal of Politics 22: 474-484. Robert A. Dahl, 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1-8., 85-86. Michael Mann 1986. „Societies as Organized Power Networks” in M. Mann: The Sources of Power. Vol.1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-33. Steven Lukes, 1986. “Introduction.” in Power, edited by Steven Lukes. New York: New York University Press, 1-18. Pierre Bourdieu, 1989. “Social Space and Symbolic Power” Sociological Theory. Vol. 7. No. 1. 14-25. Pierre Bourdieu 1983. „Forms of Capital” in J. G. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood Press, 241-258. Optional readings Robert A. Dahl. 1958. “A Critique of the Ruling Elite Model.” American Political Science Review 52: 463-9. Robert A. Dahl 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New 3 Haven: Yale University Press. Pp. 89-103, 223-228, 271-275, 305-325. Daniel Bell 1958. “The Power Elite Reconsidered.” American Journal of Sociology 64: 238- 50. Michel Foucault 1980. Power / Knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books Michel Foucault, 1991. “Governmentality,” 87-104 in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, edited by Graham Buchell, Collin Gordon, and Peter Miller. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. William G. Domhoff 1990. The Power Elite and the State: How Policy is Made in America. New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 29-64. Pierre Bourdieu 1991. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press Mark Haugaard ed., 2002. Power: A Reader. Manchester: Manchester University Press Carl Schmitt, 2007 [1929] The Concept of the Political. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Martin J. Smith, 2009. Power and the State. Basingstoke: Palgrave WEEK 3. October 1, 3. The State I-II. Mandatory readings Max Weber, 1991 [1948]. „Bureaucracy” in H. H. Gerth and C. W. Mills eds. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. London: Routledge, 196-244. Michael Mann, 1984. “The Autonomous Power of the State: Its Origins, Mechanisms and Results” European Journal of Sociology Vol. 25. No. 2. 185-213. Theda Skocpol, 1985. „Bringing the State Back in: Strategies of Analysis in Current Research” in Peter Evans et al. eds. Bringing the State Back In, New York: Cambridge University Press, 3-37. Charles Tilly, 1985. „War Making and State Making as Organized Crime” in P. Evans et al. eds. Bringing the State Back In. New York Cambridge University Press, 169-191. Pierre Bourdieu, 1994. “Rethinking the State: Genesis and Structure of the Bureaucratic Field” Sociological Theory. Vol. 12. No. 1. March, 1-18. Optional readings J. P. Nettl, 1968. “The State as a Conceptual Variable.” World Politics, 20. 4. 559-592. Stein Rokkan, 1975. “Dimensions of state formation and nation-building: a possible paradigm for research on variations within Europe”, in Tilly, C. (1975), The Formation of Nation States in Western Europe, Princeton: Princeton U. P. 562-600. Philip Abrams (1988 [1977]), “Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State.” Journal of Historical Sociology, Vol. 1. No. 1. 58-69. Gianfranco Poggi, 1978. The Development of the Modern State: A Sociological Introduction. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Alfred Stepan, 1978. The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 3-72. John Gaventa 1982. “Power and Participation” in J. Gaventa, Power and Powerlessness: 4 Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 3-32. Frank Harrison, 1983. The Modern