eBookThird Edition, Third edition (Third Edition, Third edition)
Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781775581406 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Auckland University Press |
| Publication date: | 11/01/2013 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| Pages: | 352 |
| File size: | 3 MB |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
Politics in New Zealand
By Richard Mulgan, Peter Aimer
Auckland University Press
Copyright © 2004 Richard MulganAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-77558-140-6
CHAPTER 1
A Pluralist Theory of the State
Concepts and theories
Political science, the academic study of politics, aims at a systematic and critical understanding of the major state institutions and the activities associated with them. Like any other academic discipline, it seeks generalised, theoretical knowledge of its subject matter rather than the simple recording of factual information. This, in turn, requires careful definition of key concepts and of the theoretical assumptions implicit in them. The need for conceptual precision may be obscured because political scientists commonly use the language of everyday politics and do not have as well developed a technical language as many other disciplines. The academic study of politics may therefore seem to be simply a matter of political experience and common sense, essentially the same as expert journalism (a role in which political science academics are most visible to the public).
This is a mistake. While political science does use the same language as those whose behaviour it observes and explains, some important terms in this language need to be more carefully defined and analysed than they are in normal political discourse. Moreover, while the unnecessary use of jargon is rightly to be deplored, there are areas of political science which are conceptually sophisticated and where technical language is unavoidable and appropriate. These areas often draw on terminology developed in other related disciplines, such as sociology, economics and philosophy.
An introduction to the academic study of New Zealand politics should therefore logically begin with a discussion of key terms and major theoretical approaches to politics. While the material covered in this chapter is handled as simply and straightforwardly as possible, it does involve an inevitable degree of abstraction which some readers may find uncongenial. They may therefore prefer to begin with later chapters, for instance Chapter 2, which provides an overview of New Zealand society, or Chapter 3, which introduces the main elements of the constitution, and to return to this chapter when they have more experience of social and political analysis.
The state
The main focus of this study is the institution or set of institutions known as the New Zealand 'state'. All societies or groups of people living together involve some mechanism of social organisation and control. But not all societies have had 'states'. The state, as we understand it, is a product of European history. It arose during the transition from the medieval to the modern world when Europe became politically divided into a number of competing territorial units. Each of these countries or states was controlled by a sovereign power which claimed a monopoly of legal authority within its boundaries and total allegiance from its citizens. During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, as a result of European colonialism and the spread of European institutions and assumptions, the state became universally accepted worldwide as the basic unit of political organisation. The international political world, as viewed for instance from the United Nations, has become a system of territorially based, sovereign nation-states. Each state claims the right of national self-determination within its own boundaries while recognising the governments of other states as similarly legitimate authorities in their respective territories.
The state can be understood as both the country as a whole or as a particular set of institutions within a country. An individual nation-state such as New Zealand, especially when viewed from outside, may be taken to mean the political community of New Zealand citizens and residents, the total society of all who live within the boundaries of the country. But what gives New Zealand identity as a separate independent political unit or state is one aspect of that society, the set of distinctive governmental institutions whose authority is recognised as legally binding within the territory. These institutions are the New Zealand state in a narrower, more exclusive sense, seen as distinct from the rest of the society. A modern state thus implies the existence of a complex and differentiated society in which one can distinguish between state and non-state aspects of society – between, in other words, a public and a private sector. It is in this narrower sense that the New Zealand state forms the subject matter of this book and of political analysis generally.
Concentration on a single state, within the framework of a worldwide system of sovereign states, should not obscure the fact that this system is evolving rapidly and that individual states are increasingly subject to international pressures. The need to trade in international markets and the demands exerted by an international financial system place considerable limits on the economic independence of individual states. Growing acceptance of international ethical standards, such as those promulgated by the United Nations, challenges the right of individual state governments to act without external interference. No state, particularly one as relatively small and economically vulnerable as New Zealand, can be treated in isolation. Though the focus may be national and local, the context must be global and international.
The central characteristics of the state are territorial and legal. In maintaining control within a given territory the state claims a monopoly of legal power, the right to enact laws and enforce them through the courts. It also claims the right to extract the material resources necessary to support its activities by way of taxes levied on its citizens or on others who wish to do business within its borders. The purposes followed by states are not fixed or universal. Most states seek to provide a minimum of 'law and order', that is, the personal security of individual citizens and their property and the collective security of the nation as a whole. But the broader values and goals which states should pursue and the principles which they are required to uphold vary greatly and are the perennial subject of political argument and conflict.
State institutions include government departments and the publicly funded bureaucracy, Parliament, the courts, the police, and the armed forces. In terms of constitutional law, these institutions have often been divided into three groups, depending on their relation to what is seen as the central function of the state, the function of law-making: those institutions which make the law – the legislature (in New Zealand, Parliament); those which carry out or execute the law – the executive (in New Zealand, ministers and the public service); and those which interpret and enforce the law – the judicial branch (in New Zealand, the courts supported by the police and the prison service). These distinctions are by no means hard and fast. In New Zealand's system of parliamentary government, as will be seen, Cabinet is the supreme decision-making body and, effectively, has both legislative and executive functions. The police may be seen as having an executive as well as a judicial function. Indeed, to describe the institutions of government in terms of the three-fold distinction between legislature, executive and judiciary may be not just to describe them but also to suggest a view of how they ought to operate. It may suggest, for instance, the doctrine of the separation of powers: that the executive power of ministers should be kept distinct and separate from the legislature, as it is, for instance, in the United States (Chapter 3: 56). Thus any attempt to analyse and describe the institutions of the state may lead one to adopt a particular perspective of appraisal and critical judgement. A certain type of classification or explanation will usually suggest a particular line of improvement or reform. There can be no entirely value-free political analysis.
The boundaries which mark the state off from the rest of society are imprecise. Some institutions, for instance government departments such as the Inland Revenue Department or the Ministry of Defence, are without question elements of the state. They are established under legal, statutory authority to fulfil a clear public function and are publicly financed through taxation. On the other hand, some social groups or organisations are just as clearly outside the state, for instance individual families or privately owned businesses. But some institutions are partly public and partly private. State schools or hospitals, for instance, may be publicly owned and subject to regulation. But they may be free of direct responsibility to ministers and Parliament and therefore free of immediate government control. While some of their income may be derived from taxation, some may come directly from individual members of the public through fees or other forms of personal contribution. That the distinction between state and non-state aspects of society is blurred is typical of social analysis. Distinctions must often be imposed on a mass of social behaviour which is highly interrelated and not neatly divisible into wholly self-contained segments.
'State' and 'government'
Is the 'state' the same as the 'government'? Sometimes 'government' is a term of narrower application than the 'state', focusing on the government of the day, on those who happen to hold certain key positions within the state at a particular time. New Zealanders talk, for instance of 'the Bolger National Government' or 'the Fourth Labour Government'. In this sense, the government means primarily the elected politicians in power, that is, the ministers in the Cabinet and perhaps also the other members of their parliamentary team, the government back bench. These people may be a key element in the state but they are only one part of the much larger state apparatus. In this sense, governments may come and go but the state itself continues.
On other occasions, however, the two terms may be used interchangeably. The institutions of government may be understood as coextensive with the institutions of the state. 'State control' and 'government control' mean the same thing. Public ownership or public provision of services may be referred to by either term, as with 'state housing' or 'government superannuation'. Most New Zealanders would therefore normally see little difference in meaning between these two terms.
Among academics writing about states and politics, the choice of terms may reflect different traditions of analysis and different theoretical assumptions. Mainstream political science in the English-speaking, Anglo-American world has traditionally preferred the term 'government', while continental Europeans have tended to use the term 'state'. This reflects a difference in legal and constitutional history. The legal systems of England and the United States are based on a distinctive legal tradition, grounded in the English 'common law', a system of law derived from the accumulated precedents of individual judges' decisions. Anglo-American legal theory, its 'jurisprudence', did not employ the word 'state' as a central term of constitutional law, preferring 'legislature' and 'executive' or 'government'. As the academic study of political institutions grew out of the study of legal structures, English-speaking political scientists naturally adopted the institutional terminology of their constitutional law and referred to 'governments' rather than 'states'. Indeed, when separate university departments of politics began to be established, some of them (for instance, at Harvard, Sydney and the London School of Economics) were named departments of 'Government'.
In continental Europe, on the other hand, the legal systems of the various European countries were based on the so-called 'civil law', a system of law derived from Roman law, in which the concept of the state (état in French, Staat in German) developed as a central organising concept for the institutions of legal control. It was therefore correspondingly natural for continental theorists of politics to adopt the 'state' as their focus for analysis. Contemporary theories of government which have their intellectual roots in continental European rather than Anglo-American theory are thus more likely to use the term 'state'. This is particularly true of the academic discipline of sociology, where theoretical discussion of government is largely derived from the contrasting theories of two German social theorists, Karl Marx and Max Weber, both of whom used the concept of the state (Staat). Arguments about whether 'government' or 'state' is the proper term for analysis may therefore be arguments about whether to adopt a particular perspective – the broader and potentially more critical perspective of sociology or the narrower and less radical approach of traditional political science.
Politics and the political system
Apart from 'government' and 'state', another key term is 'politics'. 'Politics' refers not so much to particular institutions as to a particular type of activity or process associated with institutions. Politics may be defined as the activity or set of activities involved in the making of collective decisions, decisions which will be binding on the members of a collectivity or group. It involves, for instance, processes of discussion, argument, bargaining, pressure, manipulation and compromise. All these processes assume that there are differences of values and interests among members of the group in question and that these differences will be resolved peacefully, without resort to force. As a process of collective decision-making, politics may occur in any type of group, in families on decisions about family matters, in workplaces over issues which affect those working in a particular business, and so on. It thus makes sense to talk of 'the politics of the family' or 'the politics of the workplace'. Political science, however, focuses on the central or core type of politics which concerns decision-making in the institutions of the state.
The analysis of the politics of government decision-making involves more than just the behaviour of those working in the state institutions themselves. The political process includes the activities of privately owned and funded organisations which aim to influence government decisions. For instance, crucial political roles are played by political parties which sponsor candidates for elections (Chapter 10) and by interest groups which seek to influence government decisions in their direction (Chapter 9). Political behaviour is also influenced by general social factors, such as economic trends or ethnic differences (Chapter 2). There are few, if any, aspects of society which may not at some time in some respect be politically relevant.
Political scientists commonly refer to all the politically relevant aspects of society as the 'political system', a useful term which serves to separate out those aspects of society which impinge on the state and politics. The notion of a 'system' indicates that the various parts of the process are closely related and interact with one another. A study of the New Zealand political system thus suggests a study which will not confine itself to the state and government institutions but will look at any aspect of society which will be relevant to understanding political decision-making and the workings of state institutions. The state remains the focus; this is what distinguishes political science from other social sciences such as economics or sociology. But in exploring this subject matter, political science will clearly need to build on the findings of these other subjects.
Rival theories of the state
The state and the political system can be viewed from a number of different perspectives. Some of these perspectives have been developed into complex and self-contained theories of the state. Such theories involve assumptions about the nature of society and the main divisions within it. They contain a view of how the state functions in society and how political power is exercised. They also, implicitly or explicitly, incorporate a set of moral and political values against which the performance of the state can be judged and changes recommended.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Politics in New Zealand by Richard Mulgan, Peter Aimer. Copyright © 2004 Richard Mulgan. Excerpted by permission of Auckland University Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Contents
List of Tables,Preface,
1 A pluralist theory of the state,
2 The plural society,
3 The constitution,
4 The Cabinet and prime minister,
5 Parliament,
6 The public sector and the public service,
7 Courts and tribunals,
8 Local and regional government,
9 Interest groups,
10 Political parties,
11 Elections and voters,
12 The media,
13 Pluralist democracy under strain,
Bibliography,
Index,