The study of comparative European politics since the 1930s shows a shift from a largely normative and institutional concern with a few larger European countries towards a clear subdiscipline of modern political science. Marked influences were the need to rethink democratie development in the light of the rise of totalitarianism and the rapid decline of democracy in most emerging new states after 1945.The field shows a strand influence of the wish to bring the particular experience of individual countries onto the (...) map of general comparative politics.Thus, one finds the effect of a typical cross-Channel dialogue contrasting Britain and France, the extrapolation of 'polarised pluralism' from an Italian background, the deliberate challenge to the Westminster model from consociational democracy theorists, and the transposition of Norwegian experience onto a Macro-Model of Europe in center-periphery terms. More recent developments also mirror new political developments, e.g., neo-corporatism, the rise and crisis of the welfare state, and concerns about public policy generally. Yet such challenges pale compared to the potential effect which processes of European integration, the decline of bipolar international polities, and above all problems of democratic development in post-totalitarian Eastern and Central Europe, must haveon comparative politics in and on Europe. (shrink)

A discussion of the political role of monarchs in contemporary Western Europe is complicated by three uncritical preconceptions : the traditionalist-monarchist view of Kings as transcendent sovereigns, the democratic-emancipatory view which assumes that Kings are by definition nothing but constitutional nonentities, and the media-view of members of a royal family as at one and the same time both superhuman and very human actors.A realistic analysis of the role of monarchs and monarchy focuses on at least five issues : whether countries (...) remained monarchies in the wake of democratisation because of, or notwithstanding being monarchies ; the relationship of monarchs to major social cleavages; the very real importance of Kings within the actions of the nominal Crown notwithstanding the importance of the principle of ministerial responsibility ; the inevitably personal role of Kings in the making, the crisis and the fall of cabinets ; and the unavoidable conflict between the personal rights and actions of monarchs and the limitations which constitutional monarchy implies. (shrink)