Revision summary
Comparison substitutes for experiment, as Lijphart argued. Mill’s designs fail when variables outnumber cases. Galton’s problem and conceptual stretching are standing limits. Official data and Eurocentric concepts add political distortion. The method is disciplined inference, not a controlled trial.
Model answer
Introduction
The comparative method is the main tool of Comparative Politics. It seeks general statements from a small number of States. Its limits are conceptual, statistical, and political.
Body
What the method tries to do
- John Stuart Mill’s method of agreement and difference is the classical template: hold some factors constant and vary others.
- Arend Lijphart treated comparison as a substitute for experiment when the political scientist cannot randomise regimes.
- Giovanni Sartori insisted that concepts must travel without stretching, or the comparison is only a word.
Main limitations
- Too many variables and too few cases: cabinets, culture, class, and colonial history cannot all be controlled in a handful of States.
- Galton’s problem: States copy constitutions and parties, so cases are not independent experiments.
- Conceptual stretching: democracy, federalism, or failed State mean unlike things in India, Belgium, and a post-conflict territory.
- Selection bias: studying only wars or only successful democracies distorts causes.
- Data are State products. Official turnout, growth, and rights scores may hide informal power.
- Value-laden concepts and Eurocentric baselines, which dependency writers and Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-system work also flag, make “development” a loaded yardstick.
- Language and meaning change the same institution. A vote is not the same act in every political culture.
What still remains
- Most-similar and most-different designs and process tracing reduce error. They do not make Political Science a laboratory.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD C[Comparative method] --> N[Few cases many variables] C --> G[Galton dependence] C --> S[Sartori stretching] N --> L[Limits of inference] G --> L S --> L
Conclusion
The comparative method is limited by few cases, dependent cases, stretched concepts, biased selection, and political data. It remains necessary. It is not a proof machine.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
What are the main challenges faced by the developing countries in the era of globalisation?
Next question in the 2022 paper (Q1). View answer →
-
Does the limit mean comparison should stop?
No. Difference is the reason to compare. The requirement is clear concepts and honest N.
-
Is large-N statistics free of these limits?
It eases the few-cases problem. It still faces stretching, dependence, and bad indicators.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2022 · Q1(d) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Bipolar structure of the world is more stable than the multipolar one. Comment. -
2022 · Q2(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
How has the electoral democracy augmented the participation of people in the democratic process? -
2022 · Q4(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
What is the realist prescription to the States to ensure their survival in an anarchical world? -
2022 · Q4(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Russian-Ukraine crisis has cast a dark shadow on the energy needs of the member states of the European Union (EU). Comment -
2022 · Q8(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss the consequences of illegal cross-border migration in India's north-eastern region -
2021 · Q1(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the political economy approach to the comparative analysis of politics. -
2021 · Q2(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
"The post-colonial state was thought of an entity that stood outside and above society as an autonomous agency." Explain -
2021 · Q2(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss the emergence of neo-realism and its basic tenets
More from this paper
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2022 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the main challenges faced by the developing countries in the era of globalisation?
Globalisation
Globalisation opens markets and tightens external rules. Wallerstein’s hierarchy and Prebisch’s trade concern still describe many late developers. Capital flight, TRIPS, and farm subsidies in the North cut policy space. Inequality, informality, and climate costs are domestic faces of the same pressure. Regional and South–South bargains are the usual reply, not autarky.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2022 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the commonalities between the Marxist and Realist approach to the study of International Politics.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
Both approaches deny that trade and law automatically pacify world politics. Carr’s critique of utopia feeds realist and Marxist readings. Morgenthau and Waltz stress State power; Lenin and Wallerstein stress capital and hierarchy. Institutions are treated as masks or tools, not as a world government in waiting. The commonality is conflictual materialism; the split is State versus class.
Q1(d) · UPSC Mains 2022 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Bipolar structure of the world is more stable than the multipolar one. Comment.
Comparative Politics
Waltz held that two poles watch each other more safely than many poles. Cold War NATO–Warsaw pairing is the exhibit of central stability. 1914 illustrates multipolar chain-ganging. Proxy wars show that bipolar peace was not global peace. Deutsch and Singer, and later interdependence, qualify the law-like claim.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.