Write thoughtful 500-word response papers on the attached readings
The papers should include the following:
• What is the author’s main argument?
• What are the key assumptions?
• Is the argument logically consistent?
Write most of your paper on the following points:
• How are the selected readings connected? Find common elements in all the readings.
• What important elements of comparative politics are discussed in the readings?
• How do the readings fit into the course as a whole? (This is critical part of the paper, make sure you write enough to show as many connections and also emphasize the differences between the articles.)
I have some comments from the professor about the previous paper to avoid in future work:
Examples: Laitin (2007) argues that…./ “…..”(Laitin 2007:50)
1. Don’t start with article title ,is not required . Start with Author’s name.
2. Mention the year after the author name For example: Laitin (2007)
3. If you use direct quote mention the page #
How the paper should be:
1. Paragraph 1 / Briefly introduce each article
2. paragraphs 2,3,4
3. paragraph 5/ Conclusion
In separate paper :
What you don’t understand from the articles?
Write down some of the Terms & Concept that is new with page # . Reading guide:
Atul Kohli’s article1. What is the state-society relationship?
2. What are revolutionary states and how is authority structured here?
3. What are bureaucratic authoritarian states?
4. What is the relationship between state and economic growth?
5. What are some criticisms of state-society relationship?
1. What is the modern state? Is it central to the study of comparative politics?
2. What is the culturalist perspective of explaining the state?
3. What is the structuralist perspective about how state works?
4. What is the rationalist perspective of studying the state?
5. What is the historical institutionalist view of the state?
6. What is the state-society perspective? Is it the same as Kohli’s
1. What is the state?
2. What are predatory states?
3. Is a growth enhancing state necessary for democracy?
4. What are some analytic problems with the subject of the state?
If you could start with Levi’s chapter then connect it to Migdal’s and then to kohli’s it will make it easier to understand the logic of the state.
As for the 4th article. Try to connect it to the study of the state and identify what theory is used.