INTRODUCTORY COURSE TO POLITICAL SCIENCE

This teaching addresses political science through the fundamental concepts of

power. It situates the discipline, its ancient and recent history as well as its
epistemological foundations, then deepens cardinal notions (Powers, politics,
state) and presents the main political regimes such as democracy, totalitarianism
and authoritarianism. At each of these stages, in a pedagogical perspective, the
reflection articulates elements from history, sociology, philosophy, law,
anthropology... The course thus introduces you to some great works of social
sciences (Durkheim, Weber...) and to the handling of basic concepts (legitimacy,
charisma).

It must be said that politics has long since begun its separation from morality.
But it does not seem to be able to complete this process. In any case, the rupture
deepens irreversibly between these two notions. At the same time, politics is
understood through rational methodological benchmarks. Science or political
sociology constitutes a set of tools and observation and study of political facts.
But the polysemic nature of the phrase "political" poses a fundamental problem
related to the definition of the term itself and also to the purpose of the
discipline.

At the end of this course, the student should be able to master the basic concepts
that constitute this science; It should be able to present without any difficulty the
historical evolution of political science in the world. Moreover, given the
importance of this matter, he should know that political science no matter what
is said is essentially about the state and political power. Finally, it should be able
to develop a spirit of observation, understanding and analysis of political
phenomena.

1
Such a study will be done in themes to facilitate their assimilation and
manipulation by your scientific mind. Thus, we will have in turn the following
themes:

❖ What is political science?

❖ What is politics?
❖ Epistemological obstacles
❖ The concept of power
❖ The people as a source of power and the problem of representation
❖ Parliament and its functions
❖ Cumulative knowledge
❖ The concept of consensus in political science
❖ Political parties

2
 THEME 1: WHAT IS POLITICAL SCIENCE?

The definition of a scientific discipline has two requirements: on the one hand,
to situate the new discipline both in space, objects or practices (by identifying
which object is retained, and which objects are abandoned) and in the space of
knowledge (thus telling the links and tensions with other more or less
neighboring disciplines; on the other hand, situate the discipline in time, that is
to say, tell its internal dynamics, its evolution, its development.

SECTION 1: THE HISTORICAL EDIFICATION OF POLITICAL

SCIENCE

Thinking about politics is not a new activity. It is found from the

Ancient Greece. But the object of this reflection, its form and its methods have
profoundly changed from the second half of the nineteenth century. In the sawing of
the other great social sciences (economics, sociology, anthropology ...) its
affirmation dates from the twentieth century where it is recognized a certain
scientific objectivity and methodological rigor. However, as a discipline, its
construction was slow and difficult.

Paragraph 1: The slow construction of political science.

It is an ancient science. It is already found in Plato and Aristotle, then in

theseventeenth century in Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) or in the new science of
Giambattista Vico later in Montesquieu and Alexis de Tocqueville. Has. The
Original Primate of Political Philosophy:

Nowadays, political science is a debate where the ideas of sociologists of

politics and philosophers of politics intertwine, hence a tormented history of the
discipline: social reflection is imposed from antiquity to the Middle Ages.

1. Plato: Born into an aristocratic family, close to the regime of the thirty
tyrants (428/347 BC) student of Socrates, (around 470-399 BC), is struck
3
 by social unrest. He retains an aversion to democracy that sentenced his
master to death in 399. His thought is mainly interested in philosophy but
also deals with the facts of society.

Indeed, Plato, founder of the academy (a school intended to train statesmen) is

also concerned with politics, in the etymological sense of the term
(polis, the city).

His thought is at first idealistic: reality, the sensitive world, are only the
reflection of a pre-existing world, that of the ideas of the beautiful, the just, the
true. In the Republic and the Laws, Plato describes the ideal city and the means
to achieve it. Plato believes in the idea of justice, the virtue of justice in a perfect
city. He thinks that oligarchy, democracy or tyranny are "decadent" regimes. He
advocates the separation of functions: some will be craftsmen (economy) other
warriors, sages ... A just city that would respect the division of labor.

2. Aristotle: Plato's pupil at the academy, Aristotle (384-322 BC) is also the
main opponent. Founder of another school in 335, (the high school, also
called the Peripatetician school because Aristotle taught while walking),
he wrote a work that addressed all areas, including the foundations of the
life of the city; we must remember the Ni nicomachus ethics and the
political, in which Aristotle considers the constitution of a city as a natural
phenomenon. It does not separate politics from morality (science from
morals as they should be). Aristotle analyzes society by defining the
communities that compose it. The first association that is natural is the
family, based on the union of man and woman on the one hand, and
master and slave on the other. The social order must reproduce the natural
inequalities of intelligence.

What interests us here is that Aristotle already does political sociology

(political science) and no longer only political philosophy. His philosophical

4
reflection is based on the examination of actual conduct and social reality. It
is based on concrete research,
very varied and extensive, conducted in a spirit of scientific observation.
Unlike Plato, Aristotle employs a method that is not abstract and deductive,
but comparative and inductive. His political doctrine (politics) he supports it
by the systematic study of existing political regimes. By writing a series of
nomographies on the constitutions of
158 Greek and foreign cities, of which only one (the constitution of the
Athenians) has reached us. Aristotle's intellectual approach remains above all
philosophical. The best forms of government are those that best respond to the
natural order. He distinguishes three that each have their own drift: monarchy
and tyranny; Aristocracy and Oligarchy, the ideal government, the one that
ensures a perfect and happy life is ultimately the one that best meets the
requirements of demography (population size), geography (territory, climate)
and the natural hierarchy of beings.

3. St. Augustine: For him, every society is at the same time an earthly city,
characterized by vice, injustice, sin, violence; It brings together
individuals who exclude God from their existence, and a heavenly city
that brings together those who live in God's exclusive love and guarantees
them peace and bliss.
4. Machiavelli (1469-1527): Political science was only really reborn at the
end of the Middle Ages with Machiavelli in his two masterpieces: "the
discourses on the first decade of Titus Live and especially the Prince".
This work of circumstance, which this courtier dedicates to Lorenzo II de'
Medici to return to grace, constitutes, at the same time, an epistemological
adventure. It truly creates political science by giving it its object, the
method and almost its laws. It is Machiavelli who identifies the object of
political science. The Prince founds the autonomy of political knowledge.

5
 The State is the central object of his study. But, if the State is the
permanent framework of analysis, the strong reflection within this
State, on the conquest of the exercise of power. The Prince is an
investigation into power, its obtaining, its maintenance, its increase, its
loss. It is a clinical study of power, its anatomy and pathology.

Modernity of the object, but also modernity of the approach. Machiavelli is

making the leap from political philosophy to political science. And this leap is a
methodological leap. At the end of the Middle Ages, it was necessary to impose
methodological positivism and objectivism because the Renaissance is first and
foremost the birth of critical thinking, intellectual emancipation, the split of the
divine and the human. Here, Machiavelli poses as an observer, not a
philosopher, a witness, not a judge. He paints politicians as they are, not as they
should be. The Prince is an observation, a report. It is the foundation of positive
political science. Political science becomes a descriptive discipline, not a
normative one. He puts himself in the school of facts. Non-moral scientific law
that governs social facts.

- In the Middle Ages: reflection is dominated by religious and theological

references: the thinkers of this approach were Saint Augustine and
Thomas Aquinas.
- With Machiavelli, (1469-1527) a real revolution will be achieved by
affirming that politics is independent of morality and the region and that it
must be analyzed in itself. Until the mid-nineteenth century, political
philosophy completely dominated political science.
- The second half of thenineteenth century is marked by the claim to the
establishment of a pure and perfect science through theoretical currents
such as scientism and positivism: Political philosophy will be too
speculative and too prescriptive.

6
 B. The institutional primacy of Public Law

One of the major characteristics of French political science is the great historical
proximity to the law. This is a particularly ambivalent relationship.

❖ The historical influence of Public Law:

The evolution of a professional and structured administration to bring the State

to be more interventionist also we have spoken of "Social State" (completion of
The Welfare State) which has led to the development of administrative science,
it should be noted that this science will be (shared) influenced by constitutional
law and administrative law. This proximity will have two questions:

5. Public law bequeaths to political science a normative vision of the state:

the state is understood as a complex set of official norms and rules
independently of actual behavior, largely implicit social norms
6. The law bequeaths an institutionalist vision of politics

Also, it was noted that some countries have made significant progress in
building political science, notably through the creation of institutes and
Schools of instruction of the said science. This is the case, for example, in the
Member States.
United States of America, Great Britain, Germany and France.

• United States
7. In 1880, the School of Political Science was created by John Dungers.
8. In 1886: Publication of the journal political science by John Dungers
9. In 1887: Creation of the University of Political Science
10.In 1903: Creation of the American Political Science Association
11.In 1906: publication of the American Political Science published by the
association
12.Appearance of the quantitative method in political analysis

7
 13.In 1932 the first surveys were conducted.
• In Great Britain
14.Emergence of political science between the 02 wars
15.Publication of HERMN FINER's book on political actors
16.Publication of methods of social learning by SIDNEY and BEATRICE
17.Publication of HAROLD LARSKY's book on political problems
• In Germany
18.The use of the sociological work of MAX WEBER
19.Popularization of social sciences in German universities
20.Debates on democracy and the German political system
21.The creation of the University of FRANKFURT in 1930
• In France
22.1870: Creation of the Free School of Political Science, now the Institut
d'Etudes Politiques de Paris
23.1886: Creation of the journal Les annales de l'école des sciences
politiques
24.The claim of political science by jurists
25.1949: Birth of the French Association of Political Science
26.1951: Creation of the French journal of political science

C. The current primacy of political sociology

The sociological approach is an approach that has always been brandished by

great sociologists. According to this approach, the global units of society are
indispensable in political analysis. In other words, the political phenomenon can
only be better analyzed if it is related to other social domains (cultural, religious,
economic...).

Paragraph 2: The slow recognition of political science A.

Academic recognition:

8
The development of political science has gone through 3 successive stages:

• The first stage of institutionalization (1850-1930)

a) The conditions of birth of political science
27.Intellectual conditions: Separation of politics from religion and morality
from Machiavelli, separation of politics and economics from Adam Smith,
and separation of state and civil society from Hegel.

SECTION 2: ACADEMIC CONTOURS OF POLITICAL SCIENCE:

The latest addition to the social sciences, political science is confronted, like the
other human sciences, with the problem of the "construction of its object", but
also with the question of method.

Paragraph 1: The question of objects:

The object makes it possible to distinguish one science from the others.

A. THE PURPOSES OF THE POLICY:

Every discipline is alive; it means that its objects are born, develop and
disappear, replaced by others. Also, it will be said that science political science
is essentially based on the object of its study. It refers to two fundamental
conceptions:

28.Conception of a legal nature of which the notion of State is the support

29.Conception of a sociological nature based on the notion of power. Then
Political science will be studied from the perspective of the science of the
state or science of power?

A. THE ACTUAL OBJECT OF SCIENCE

a) Political science or the science of the State

9
Maurice DUVERGER believes that this perception of discipline is both the
oldest and the closest to common sense. The "polis" city, which has been
transformed into a "nation state", is the fundamental object of political science.
This conception gives an important part to the notion of "sovereignty" insofar as
the fact of assuming political science as a science relating to the State and
considering the State as a type of community most strongly organized and best
integrated, leads to a particular observation:

30. The State would be a kind of perfect society but dependent on no other
and dominating all others.

For the proponent of this conception, political phenomena are reduced to the
organization and power of the state. Léon DUGUIT believes that political
phenomena are those that relate to the origin and functioning of the State. This
conception is clearly nourished by the hegemony of Public Law over Political
Science. She is represented by Georg JELLINECK, Marcel PRELOT, Jean
DABIN, Roger Henri SOLTAU, Alfred GRAZIA.

b) Political science is the science of power

This conception is based on the rejection of the superiority of the public

collectivity, in particular the sovereignty of the State, considered as an ideology,
and not as a reality. The holder of this school (Max WEBER, Harold D.
LASSWELL, Robert DAHL, Raymond ARON, Georges BURDEAU...)
consider that the phenomenon of power and, consequently, of politics, is
intrinsic to any organized collectivity.

Georges BURDEAU specifies that the political character is that which attaches
itself to any fact, act or situation, in that they reflect the existence in a human
group of the relations of authority and obedience established with a view to a
common end.

10
The particularity of the power of the State in relation to that of other groups in
collectivities must not be considered a priori, that is to say that its transcendent
or sovereign nature must not take the place of a dogmatic hypothesis but which
remains to be proved.

Léon DUGUIT proposes a model of power relations within a collectivity that

stem from the distinction between rulers and governed. Power would be that
phenomenon that allows the rulers to obtain the adhesion and submission of the
governed. But this conception involves two major difficulties:

1. It would be a mistaken assumption to consider any unequal social

relationship as a power relationship. Maurice DUVERGER asserts that
power is different from mere influence and the term power must be returned
to a particular category of influence or power: that which conforms to the
group's system of norms and values and is therefore considered legitimate.
2. The relationships that underpin communities and groups are based on power,
and political activity would be an ongoing quest for power and influence
within a group or collectivity, that is, for necessarily unequal relationships.
this argument must be qualified to the extent that society is regulated by
general and abstract norms and for the purposes of order and justice.

C. THE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH

Like all other disciplines of the social sciences, political science borrows the
methods, techniques and instruments of analysis. To study a political
phenomenon, it proceeds through observation, experimentation and objective
interpretation. To observe is to take a look at the environment around us. To
experiment is to reproduce a phenomenon in order to verify its recurrence. To
interpret is to compare the results obtained with the initial hypotheses in order to
identify laws that should serve as theories for knowledge.

11
The question of the method arises on two levels: privileging facts and values on
the one hand; explain or understand on the other hand.

1. Focus on facts and values:

These are:

31.to understand the tradition of normativism, that is, the best regime desired
by Plato and Aristotle and;
32.The tradition of empiricism: that is, the exaltation of facts, the obsession
with techniques and the limits of empiricism.
2. Explain or understand

Explanation or understanding is declined here on two sociological

parameters: explanatory sociology and comprehensive sociology.

Ultimately, to the question of what is political science? We say that it is a

science that studies the state, power, better political phenomena. It proceeds by
observing, experimenting and objectively interpreting phenomena.

12
 THEME 2: WHAT IS POLITICS?
Defining the "political" concept or concepts is not at all easy, because each of its
components is itself polysemy (each term covering several contents and
involving several values). Thus the word "political" reveals so many different
uses that it seems impossible to unify them behind even a generic definition
(Section 1). As a field, the extent of the policy is extremely questionable, not
least because it varies according to space and time (Section 2).

SECTION 1: THE IMPOSSIBLE UNITY OF POLITICS

The plurality of uses of the word "political" underlines not only the extreme
diversity of the meanings of the word, but also their heterogeneity (A). This
announces the impossibility of defining the policy (B).

Paragraph 1: Politics: Plurality of uses

13
An object is political only because of a historical, linguistic or social
construction.

1. Common uses:

A distinction will be made between normative and descriptive uses and those
that are generic and specific.

❖ Normative and descriptive uses:

33.Normative use: "The art of deceiving men" (D'ALEMBERT) (this man is
a political end)
34.Descriptive use: refers to the universe of the administration of a domain
of the management of a set. "Talking about France's African policy, social
policy".
❖ Generic and specific uses: The criterion used here is not the
existence of a synonym, but the extent of what covers the political
term which may vary:
35.in the first sense, politics covers all public affairs for example "the case
of the Islamic headscarf is not religious but political"

36.in the second sense, politics refers to governing a human society

37.in the third sense, politics as a way of governing
38.in the fourth sense, politics refers to a tactic, a strategy, a set of
techniques.
39.in the fifth sense, policy refers to the administration or management of a
domain.

The term political has several definitions and meanings. Etymologically, it

comes from the word "polis" that is to say "city" in ancient Greece, or even from
the term "politeia" that is to say the way in which the city is organized the power
within it is structured. Another difficulty emerges from the use of the term

14
"political" of an androgynous nature, that is to say that can be done in the
masculine is in the feminine.

40.In the masculine: the political means first of all the politician. But it is not
this meaning of the term that opposes it to the expression considered
feminine; politics also means the image that society had of itself, in
particular the "totality", the place of the totality of the social bond, the city
or the community.

More precisely, the set of induced structures, relations of authority and

obedience established with a view to a common end.

41.In the feminine: Politics means in the first place, the set of actions that the
rulers or other current social undertake in order to make decisions, to
influence the decision-making process, or to occupy positions of
responsibility. That is to say, the dynamic translation of all the phenomena
involved in the conquest of the exercise of power.

The policy can take on a neutral meaning: that of "management", i.e. a set of
technical, legal and financial measures to act on a specific sector or to deal with
a specific problem.

Politics can also be understood as a strategy, a set of successive actions tending

towards a given goal.

In a very particular use, politics takes on a pejorative meaning. Jean Paul

SARTRE celebrated the expression "I eat, I drink, I don't do politics".

The expression "political" in an extreme sense also means hypocrisy or

Machiavellianism.

15
 THEME 3: EPISTEMOLOGICAL OBSTACLES

For Bachelard, when we consider the psychological conditions of the progress

of science, we soon arrive at this conviction that it is in terms of obstacles that
we must pose the problem of scientific knowledge. To arrive at scientific truth,
the researcher must overcome the causes of stagnation, regression and inertia
that we will call epistemological obstacles. These errors prevent the researcher
from accessing scientific knowledge. There are several of which are the main
obstacles to remember:
✓ The illusion of empiricism and immediate knowledge: According to
Bachelard, this is the first obstacle. It is due to a fascination of the real and
the immediate, while this can in no way provide a sure support. The
researcher must avoid taking the common opinion as a counting agent:
the opinion of the newspapers. Very often, social and political phenomena
are judged according to one's tribal, ethnic, religious and social affiliation
etc ..... we then speak of ethnocentrism to designate this attitude to all
bring back to oneself ". For wrong, every researcher should return to

16
 applied rationalism, proceeding by the construction of the object and
the administration of evidence.
✓ The temptation of the single explanation: It is a question of avoiding the
attitude of wanting to explain a political fact through a single factor or a
single explanation. Scientific analysis is a multifactorial analysis. Both
diachrony (the past) and synchronicity (the present) must be taken into
account. The vertical and horizontal dimensions must be taken into
account. Finally, it is necessary to explain a fact through several
complementary factors to account for the totality of reality.
Example: Africa's poverty cannot be explained solely by the colonial fact.

✓ Inter-causality. This obstacle raises the problem of the inter-influence of

structures and behaviors. We must avoid believing that the influence
between two structures or between two people is unequivocal. For it is
proved that just as the master influences his pupil, the pupil also
influences the master. Just as the teacher influences the taught, just as the
taught influences the teacher. Men institute the law, but after that, this law
in turn structures their behavior. Social variables therefore influence each
other.
Subjectivity; this is a major and deeply rooted obstacle among researchers. It is
difficult to detach yourself completely from it. Subjectivity reflects this attitude
to make analysis by mixing his tastes, his cultural and philosophical preferences,
his personal choices and his affective and passionate dimension. Knowledge, in
order to be universal and communicable, must be anonymous. To avoid it, the
researcher must operate "his own psychoanalysis". However, subjectivity is not
always negative. This is all the more true because it is important to have a
certain intersubjectivity in society.

17
Images and the reality of images: this is a very important obstacle in political
science. Here every researcher must distinguish between his subjectivity, the
objective reality of the phenomenon studied and the image he has of this
phenomenon. It is therefore understandable that any researcher in his study
should not confuse the constructed image of a phenomenon and the objective
reality of the same phenomenon. The example commonly taken is that of
General De Gaulle who launched the call from London for the liberation of
France and resistance against the enemy. This is an objective fact. But then, at
the end of the war ended by the French victory, De Gaulle is presented as the
savior or the providential man to whom France should resort whenever it is in
crisis. Here, we can not hesitate to talk about a constructed image. This
construction will however be at the heart of his return in 1958 to Power.

In view of the above, it is clear that the development of scientific knowledge is

not easy. For Bachelard, when he presents himself to scientific culture, a human
spirit, is never young, he is even very old, because he has
'age of his prejudices. To access science is to spiritually rejuvenate.
The researcher must therefore make an epistemological break (break with
prejudices). He must be the photographer of reality and the secretary of
observation. Max Weber will say that the researcher, failing that, must observe
an axiological neutrality (be neutral with values).

18
 THEME 4: THE CONCEPT OF POWER
According to Max WEBER, the concept of "power" (Macht) is sociologically
"amorphous" that is to say that it is vague, undifferentiated, can rigorous.
Indeed, few words are so overloaded with different meanings and connotations.

The Greek words: Arches and Kratein: Among the terms that the Greeks used
to designate power, we will remember two: Arches and Kratein.

42.Archès refers to an institutionalist approach to power that the law has

always privileged.
43.Kratein, Kratos: refers more to someone's power over someone.
❖ Latin words: among the Romans we find again two fundamental
terms to designate the power (the potestas and the auctoritas) that
Cicero invites us to distinguish when he writes: potestas, in populo
auctoritas in senatu, sit) translation
(while power resides in the people, authority belongs to the Senate
or "potentia or potere," the fact of being capable.

19
The auctoritas did not refer to standards but to a quality of divine origin.

Once this lexicological terrain has been marked, it is necessary to deepen this
notion considering in turn the nature of power and the specificity of political
power.

SECTION 1: NATURE AND POWER

on what ground is the problem decided? Paragraph 1: The

personal essence of power

There are three questions that come back to us here:

44.First, that which amounts to posing the existence of an abstract and

immutable nature of power;
45.secondly, it presupposes that power is an entity susceptible to possession,
detention;

46.Third, power always comes from extraordinary beings who intrinsically

possess particular qualities or birth.

A. The tradition of sacralization of the holder of power:

Historically, power was seized, wrested, occupied but not entrusted after a
strong political will. So it was hard to argue that we loved the king because we
had chosen him.

Christianity will play a considerable role in the sacralization of the bearers

of power. It is not only that it tends strategically to confront the powers that be
("give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar", was already intended to
emphasize that Christians did not challenge the power of Rome, unlike the
Pharisees); it derives above all its doctrine from a divine origin of all power.
"Omni protestas a Deo) says St. Paul. Very quickly, the one who exercises
power will be considered as the chosen one of God, the one who by his
20
exceptional personal and natural qualities, manifests a divine dimension. The
German historian Ernst KANTOROWICZ went much further by demonstrating
that the modern conception of power proceeded directly from an import of
theology (King has a mystical body on one side and a political body on the
other).

B. Contemporary extensions

The thesis of the personal essence of power knows two forms of extension: one
at the normative or theoretical level, the other at the descriptive or analytical
level Both do not have the same value:

47.Theoretically, power is conceived and seen as an attribute, a substance, a

thing susceptible to possession, possession or appropriation (I have the
power or it has the power).
48.Analytically, Max WEBER presents his three foundations of power

• Traditional domination: based on the weight of tradition, the authority

of the past, the belief in the sanctity of customs (the hereditary monarch.
• Charismatic domination: based on the heroic virtues, the extraordinary
qualities of the holder of power.
• Rational legal domination: based on the belief in the validity of
rationally established rules and the law. This is the power held by
government authorities.

Paragraph 2: The strategic nature of power

This is the work of Michel FOUCAULT and Michel CROZIER.

A. Power as the "government" of behavior (Michel FOUCAULT).

FOUCAULT for him, power and diffuse and complex, power means governing
individual behaviors.

B. Power as strategic interaction (Michel CROZIER)

21
CROZIER is one of the great French sociologists who draws his inspiration
largely from classical American sociology (current of
intercationism). CROZIER makes it possible to grasp power concretely, other
merits is the relativization and the distinction between the central actors of the
decision-making environment and the supposedly peripheral actors.

SECTION 2: POLITICAL POWER

As a common phenomenon, power is found in the family, churches, companies,

schools etc.

Paragraph 1: Forms of political power

Has. The multidimensionality of power:

1. Multidimensional approach: Thomas Hobbes was the first to conceive
the mechanics of this power. Then will follow Max WEBER and Robert
DAHL.
2. Two-dimensional approach: with authors such as Peter BACHRACH and
Morton BARATZ, for them the power with two faces, one
visible and the other invisible.
3. Three-dimensional approach: with Steven LUKES.

B. The game of the outfitter

These are two approaches: the intentionalist approach and the structuralist
approach.

Paragraph 2: The components of political power

Power becomes political only if it has some important characteristics, so the

main one is the existence of legitimacy.

22
 49. Power and legitimacy: All power, even legal power, unbridled seeks a
certain legitimacy. Legitimacy makes it possible to answer the question of
what one person commands another and one obeys him. Investiture is a
means of legitimizeing a power.
Any power claiming to do without investiture is not accepted as
legitimate. In Europe, as in traditional Africa, investiture has a sacred
dimension. The sacred here plays a dual role: to legitimize power and
draw the limits of that power.

Has. The main characteristics of power.

50.Political power must be distinguished from social power. For power to
become political, a society must therefore recognize a space specific to
politics.
51.Political power is above all a matter of symbolic representation.
52.Political power presupposes permanence and it must be a collective
phenomenon
53.Political power mobilizes different types of resources.

B. The Central Component: Legitimacy

Political power is fundamentally based on legitimacy. For BOURLAMAQUI,

sovereignty is the right to direct the actions of the members of society with the
power to coerce; a right to which all individuals are obliged to submit to it
without resistance. From that moment on, the relationship between sovereignty
and power is established: All power to be effective must be sovereign. This
sovereignty has its origin in the sacred and gives power an unassailable

23
foundation. But then, we notice that in all human societies, power generally
resorts to the sacred and the religious to obtain recognition.

THEME 5: THE PEOPLE AS A SOURCE OF POWER AND

THE PRORLEME OF REPRESENTATION

The ancient Greeks understood that a society could only function harmoniously
if each made the effort to respect the other. Since the responsibility of some has
limits where that of others begins, political power and justice must ensure that
they are strictly respected. But then, when a representative of an entire people
voluntarily registers outside the will of the latter, he does not only perjure
himself, he flouts popular representation in what is most fundamental.
Therefore, it is appropriate to consider this theme by presenting on the one hand
The people as a source of power (A). On the other hand, it will be a question of
deciding on the notion of popular representation (B).

A. THE PEOPLE AS A SOURCE OF POWER

It is an undisputed phenomenon, namely that the people are the source of power.
In the principles of democracy, power belongs to the people who exercise it
through their elected representatives. This delegation of power takes place

24
through free and transparent elections. A political power voluntarily coming
from the people rarely suffers from contestations. This state of affairs has led
dictatorial regimes to often hold elections to elect their representatives. But,
reality shows that these are rigged elections that simply prove that this is a
strategy of fraudulent legitimation, orchestrated by the power in place to avoid
any challenge. In Cameroon, it is expressly stated that power belongs to the
people who exercise it through their representatives, that no fraction, that no
individual has the right to appropriate the exercise of it: this is the clear
manifestation of representation.

B. THE PROBLEM OF REPRESENTATION

It is accepted that democracy in Athens was a direct democracy. Here, men

met in a public place (agora) to decide the affairs of the city.
But today, society is much larger and more complex. This state of affairs is no
longer possible. You have to be represented to speak in the assemblies. We then
move from direct democracy to representative democracy; Then the problem
of representation appears. Indeed, to represent is to stand and act in place of an
individual or a group of individuals. Political representation is therefore the fact
that a principal (people) delegates to the mandatary (representative), the
task of defending his interests. Starting from this definition, the mandatary who
is the elected representative of the people represents the precise sectoral
interests: this is the basis of popular representation.
But then, representation poses 03 fundamental problems:
➢ How to identify the general interest in an assembly made up of divergent
and contradictory interests?
➢ How to ensure the competence and expertise of representatives to deal
with professional issues?

25
 ➢ How to solve the problem of the identity of the representative and the
represented?
To correct these limits of representation, GENERAL DE GAULLE will
reintroduce into French political life the practice of referendum. This is a direct
consultation, where the holder of institutional power interacts directly with the
people. But in any case, even with the referendum, the nature of the questions
asked shows that the problems of representation are not solved.
In addition, the representatives of the people meet in the national assemblies,
known as parliament.
THME 6: PARLIAMENT AND ITS FUNCTIONS

Parliament is an institution pecunit to modern democracies. It covers various realities

according to the political regimes. It is unicameral when it consists of a single
chamber. It is bicameral when it consists of 02 rooms. However, a question remains
and arises acutely in our eyes of reality, namely: from whom do parliamentarians
derive their mandates? Of their parties or their voters? This is an important question.
But it cannot be more so than questioning the functions of parliament as an
expression of the popular will.
Parliament performs 03 essential functions:
➢ Law-making: this is the traditional function of parliament. That is the
legislative function of parliament. While it is true that in order to be
passed, a law must be debated and adopted in plenary, we realize that in
practice this is not always the case. In countries with ultra-dominant
parties, bills pass through the national assembly as letters are mailed.
➢ The vote on the budget: this is a very important task that is devoted
almost everywhere in the world to an annual session. The budget thus
voted presents all the revenue and expenditure of the State for an annual
period.

26
 ➢ Faction control of the government: this is a function rarely assumed
completely. This is due to the fact that in many regimes there is political
intimacy between the government and the members of the national
assembly (case of African countries).

THEME 7: CUMULATIVE KNOWLEDGE

Cumulative knowledge finds its foundation in thomas kuhn's famous work, The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions. For this author, all scientific knowledge must be
part of a logical continuity with reference to previous knowledge. Such a strategy
allows science to evolve. This is why DAVID APTER questions how research
questions should be formulated in such a way as to maximize their scientific utility
and cumulative values.
It posits in essence that any research work must be linked to previous work by adding a
plus, on a duality covering 02 points.
➢ At the level of the finesse of the questions posed to reality: it is necessary to
identify a niche that does not seem to have caught the attention of the
predecessors;
➢ At the level of the production of results: it is necessary to reach an agreement
which, while being added, is in line with previous knowledge.

From that moment on, we cannot hesitate to speak of cumulative knowledge.

However, it poses 04 difficulties to know:

➢ The accumulation of knowledge: how to anonymize knowledge

27
 when we know that it is difficult to detach subjectivity from the observer?
It is the problem of subjectivity that is raised here;
➢ The use of concepts loaded with axiological gravity: this is the
manipulation of words that have a high load in values, and whose use is
much more inclined to the judgment of values.
➢ The pragmatism of research: this is the use of research for political
purposes (case of WOODROW WILSON).
➢ Tautology: it is the attitude to repeat words by which we think we explain
a reality when in fact we do not explain anything.

THEME 8: THE CONCEPT OF CONSENSUS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE

Etymologically, the word "consensus" comes from "consencio" (conformity

of consent) and "conseniio" (art of singing together) we realize that even to
sing together, we need a general agreement of the 07 musical notes. In doing so,
we can say that consensus in its congenital sense refers to general consent.
However, from the recent reappearance in our societies, this concept has a
completely different meaning from that of ancient Greece. On the basis of this
antinomy, we may have to raise the problem of defining consensus. Better yet,
what is consensus? Such a question is of both theoretical and conceptual
interest, because it makes it possible to understand that in political science there
is a perpetual redefinition of concepts. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider
this theme presented in a first part, the search for a definition of the word
"consensus" (A). Limiting oneself to this would not account for the totality of
the problem posed. Therefore, it becomes imperative to present the consensus as
experienced by the major countries in the world (B).
A. IN SEARCH OF A DEFINITION OF CONSENSUS

28
In this part, it is appropriate to envisage a duality that takes into account the
approximation with the neighboring terms (1) and the presentation of the
characteristics of the consensus before arriving at an operational definition (2).

1- Consensus and its related terms

The terms close to consensus are: legitimacy, political socialization and public
opinion.
✓ Consensus and legitimacy: Legitimacy is acceptance by the vast
majority. This implies the existence of a pole of contestation that leads us
to say that legitimacy cannot be a consensus, if so an implicit consensus.
✓ Consensus and political socialization: Socialization is a process through
which the individual internalizes and assimilates a set of values and
practices within the social group to which he belongs. It aims at the
specific objectives that can be observed at 02 levels: to ensure the
continuity of the group and to allow the integration of the individual into
the group. This is how the link between socialization and political
consensus appears, because political socialization leads all citizens to
accept a regime and the rules that ensure its functioning.
✓ Consensus and public opinion: the survey is the expression par
excellence of public opinion. But one question remains; Can the
techniques of conducting a survey allow us to assimilate it to a
consensus? one thing is true, and that is that the development of the
sampling, the questionnaire and the presentation of the results do not
allow us to equate the public opinion produced with the consensus.

From the observation of this rapprochement, between consensus and its

neighbouring terms, a set of characteristics emerges which should make it
possible to obtain an operational definition of consensus.

29
 2- The characteristics of consensus are as follows: o Consensus
is not spontaneous, it is the fruit of socialization.
o Consensus is not irreversible o Consensus is a sign of social cohesion and
a factor in increasing that cohesion
Of all these general considerations, we can finally define the consensus as: "a
concept with ideological resonance that reflects a situation in which the
conflicts of rationality in the global society are hidden, thus ensuring both a
minimum (jet) cohesion and the legitimization of claims to exercise state
power. »

B. THE GREAT EXAMPLES OF CONSENSUS IN THE WORLD

We will see here, how the consensus manifests itself in the United States, in
Great Britain, in France:

❖ The Consensus in the United States: it is structured around confidence in

the constitution outside of which no changes are accepted. There is also an
attachment to a society that favours individual initiative, the rejection of
class consciousness and the promotion of political decentralization. It is a
consensus bristling with conflicts.
❖ The Consensus in Great Britain: it is based on the unitary character of
the state, the use of habits and customs never questioned and the
responsibility of the government before parliament. On the other hand, the
evolution of mentalities and the democratic culture that confirms global
cohesion, Great Britain is called to live without consensus despite their
obsession with this concept.
❖ The Consensus in France: it is based on a climate of tolerance that
prevents clashes from degenerating into civil war. It is based on the values
of republican democracy, namely: liberty-equality-fraternity.

30
 THEME 9: POLITICAL PARTIES

Political parties exist in almost every political regime in the world.

While being the expression of popular sovereignty, the political party is
omnipresent in both authoritarian and liberal regimes. The French, German and
Cameroonian constitutions are a legal consecration. Therefore, we will consider
their study in a dual approach: which duality goes from their definition (A) to
the different approaches that make it possible to apprehend them (B).

A. THE DEFINITION OF THE POLITICAL PARTY

JOSEPH LAPALOMBARA postulates that to define a political party, it must

be distinguished from other organizations such as leagues, pressure groups,
social movements, rallies and clubs. According to Fauteur, 04 cumulative
criteria define the political party:
➢ There must be a sustainable organization: an organization whose life
expectancy is greater than that of the leaders;
➢ There is a need for a local organization with a national extension;
➢ It requires the deliberate will of national and local leaders to effectively
take and exercise power;
➢ There must be a concern to seek popular support through free and
transparent elections.

Ultimately, these criteria make it possible to propose an operational definition of

the political party. A political party is a sustainable organization, with a
national extension and a firm will to exercise directly or indirectly the power it
has received from the electorate.
In political science, 03 approaches allow the study of political parties
B. APPROACHES TO POLITICAL PARTY ANALYSIS
31
The study of political parties uses several complementary and non-exclusive
approaches. These approaches are: the structural approach (management
system), the ideological approach (objectives) and the functional approach
(activities).

- The structural approach

Here, we study the political party by looking for its structure called, system of
supervision of elected officials. 02 conceptions clash to define the structure of
political parties. For ROBERTO MICHELS, political parties have an
essentially hierarchical structure, with a summit made up of almost
irremovable leaders and a base made up of activists and adherents. This is a
bureaucratic oligarchy. On the other hand, for ELDERSVELD, the political
party has a stratarchic structure. That is, an open and non-pyramidal
organization. Power here is shared at all levels. This is a stratarchy or
grouparchy. However, the inadequacy of this model has led to the development
of other models to account for partisan reality.
- The ideological approach
Here, one studies the political party by looking for the ideology pursued by its
men. Ideology can be defined as a system of coherent thoughts, a shared
worldview that is for the group and the individuals who adhere to it a guide in
all the actions of life, an answer to all questions. The ideology is linked to the
activities pursued by the party. In the world, ideologies can be capitalist or
communist. This approach allows us to distinguish between mass parties and
cadres parties. However, any ideology must be in relation to reality. It must not
be an authentic utopia. It doesn't have to be a myth.
- The functional approach

32
The word function has 02 meanings. A mathematical sense and a biological
sense. In mathematics, function is any variable studied in relation to other
variables. In biology, function is the contribution that an element made to the
organization to which it belongs. It is by combining the two approaches that we
arrive at the functional method. To explain a social phenomenon would therefore
be to show what it is for. There is therefore a link between function and need.
Therefore, to understand the function, one must look for the needs it meets. 02
designs clash here. That of absolute functionalism of RADCLIFF BROWN
and MALINOWSKI
BRONISLAW and that of the relativized functionalism of ROBERT K.
MERTON.

In any case, political parties perform the following functions:

• The function of selection and supervision of members.

• The function of stabilization and legitimation.
• Function of political socialization of its members (education of partisan
populations).
• The tribunitian function (defense of minorities, space for discussion
etc ...)
• The function of political succession
• the function of the genesis of political programmes.

33