The Structure and Organization of Government: Concepts and Issues

1985 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Guy Peters

The most basic question about the structure and organization of government is Why we should be concerned about this question at all?' Many of us trained in political science programs during the behavioral revolution were taught to believe that the structures of government were insignificant as a focus for research. The structures ofgovernment became encapsulated in an opaque black box; that part of the political system where decisions were made. Fortunately, this view no longer prevails and there is increasing interest in structural questions, in part generated by the increasing interest in the state as a focus for political inquiry (Dyson, 1980; Benjamin and Elkin, 1985). Much of the work on the state as yet, however, leaves that concept largely undifferentiated and has not dealt systematically with the structure of the state apparatus. Thus, concern for the development of state theory, as well as the concerns of those interested in public policy, has returned structural questions to a more central position in political science.

1985 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean C. Oi

Despite its widespread currency in political science, the concept of clientelism has rarely found its way into the literature on communist systems. Students of communist politics regularly note the importance of personal ties, and many recognize the significance of informal bonds in economic and political spheres atalllevels of society. Some even apply the term “clientelism” to the political behavior they describe. Yet these studies are generally limited to elite-level politics, to factionalism, career mobility, recruitment patterns, and attainment of office at the top- to middle-level echelons of the bureaucracy.2Few have considered clientelism as a type of elite-mass linkage through which the state and the party exercise control at the local level, and through which individuals participate in the political system.


1953 ◽  
Vol 68 (3) ◽  
pp. 434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver Garceau ◽  
David Easton

1954 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 1050 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heinz Eulau ◽  
David Easton

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
KÁTIA ALVES FUKUSHIMA

O governo Chávez (1999-2013) situou-se em um processo de rupturas com o sistema político vigente até 1998, constituindo-se em um novo bloco no poder, em que o presidente Chávez conseguiu se utilizar do aparelho do Estado para difundir sua ideologia e construir uma nova hegemonia no país. Durante 14 anos no poder, Chávez possuía significativa legitimidade perante a população. Esta, explicada por suas políticas sociais, as chamadas “Missões Bolivarianas”. Neste sentido, nosso intuito consiste em analisar o governo Chávez a partir dos avanços sociais, buscando mostrar se houve o fortalecimento da democracia – no que se refere à educação, saúde e emprego, à diminuição da pobreza e a melhor distribuição de renda. Para tanto, tal análise se fará a partir da base de dados do Latinobarómetro, CEPAL e PNUD.ABSTRACTThe Chávez government (1999-2013) was in a process of ruptures with the political system in force until 1998, constituting a new block in power, in which President Chavez was able to use the state apparatus to spread his ideology and build a new hegemony in the country. For 14 years in power, Chavez had significant legitimacy vis-à-vis the population. This, explained by its social policies, the so-called "Bolivarian Missions". In this sense, our intention is to analyze the Chávez government based on social advances, trying to show if there was a strengthening of democracy - in terms of education, health and employment, poverty reduction and better income distribution. To do so, this analysis will be done from the database of Latinobarómetro, ECLAC and UNDP.Palavras-chave: Governo Chávez; Avanços Sociais; Democracia.Keywords: Chávez Government; Social Advances; Democracy.Recebido em 22 de Janeiro de 2018.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-63
Author(s):  
Ruth Roded

Beginning in the early 1970s, Jewish and Muslim feminists, tackled “oral law”—Mishna and Talmud, in Judaism, and the parallel Hadith and Fiqh in Islam, and several analogous methodologies were devised. A parallel case study of maintenance and rebellion of wives —mezonoteha, moredet al ba?ala; nafaqa al-mar?a and nush?z—in classical Jewish and Islamic oral law demonstrates similarities in content and discourse. Differences between the two, however, were found in the application of oral law to daily life, as reflected in “responsa”—piskei halacha and fatwas. In modern times, as the state became more involved in regulating maintenance and disobedience, and Jewish law was backed for the first time in history by a state, state policy and implementation were influenced by the political system and socioeconomic circumstances of the country. Despite their similar origin in oral law, maintenance and rebellion have divergent relevance to modern Jews and Muslims.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document