General Introduction to Political Sociology

Political sociology encompasses both sociology and politics, raising several questions. Political sociology is considered one of the most recent social sciences, having been studied as an independent discipline in France only since the 1970s and in the Maghreb since the early 1980s. This development has opened up a field for many questions and ambiguities surrounding this new science. Is political sociology a branch of sociology or a subject of political science? To clarify, is the approach of political sociology a branch of sociology, and what are the boundaries separating social phenomena from political phenomena?

After the independence of political science, scholars in the field have worked diligently to formulate a theoretical and institutional knowledge base that allows for a successful scientific understanding of political phenomena. Political science has reached a point resembling a crisis, exacerbated by rapid developments in the political realm, the diversity of political behaviors, and political systems among nations, as well as the inability of political science to adequately organize these phenomena. Additionally, their reliance on traditional methodologies and their claims of scientific rigor have proven insufficient to encompass all political phenomena. However, the real crisis lies in the growing conviction among political scientists that understanding political phenomena and prioritizing them is challenging without returning to the underlying social structures that interact with them. Thus, even for political scientists, the need arises to revisit society and explore political priorities in the social and study political phenomena in their social context. Political sociology emerges as a scientific response to this crisis.

A sociologist can only have a relationship with politics; isolating social factors from politics in this field is difficult. Raymond Aron states, “The sociologist becomes a politician whether he wishes it or not.” Here, we observe the interconnectedness between societal reality and political reality, as every aspect of human sociology is interwoven with politics, achieving knowledge of what is political and what is social.

1. Definition of Sociology.
2. Political Sociology as a Branch of Sociology.
3. Definition of Political Science.
4. The Relationship between Political Sociology and Political Science.

A. Definition of Sociology: Most sociologists agree that providing an accurate definition of sociology is challenging for several reasons, including the relative novelty of the discipline. Sociology is an interconnected and complex science intertwined with many ideologies and schools of thought.

Another definition cites Auguste Comte as the founder of sociology in 1838, although one cannot overlook the contributions of Ibn Khaldun in this field. Given the multitude of definitions, an agreement may be reached on the following definition:

According to Gaston Bachelard, sociology is the study of the social structure and the conditions that shape social institutions, as well as the continuous results leading to social sciences, combining it with the philosophy of sociology by examining the role of social psychology and studying the primary factors contributing to changes in social structures.

B. Political Sociology as a Branch of Sociology: Émile Durkheim considered sociology to be a branch of social science.

C. Differences between Sociology and Political Science: Both sciences share the same subject: “society.” Political sociology studies phenomena within their social context.

Durkheim advocated for distinguishing between sociology and other social sciences, establishing a general framework for these branches.

D. Branches of Sociology: It consists of several branches:

1. General Sociology.
2. Legal and Social Sociology, which branches into:
   • Political organization.
   • Social organization.
   • Criminology.

Durkheim acknowledges that sociology encompasses all social phenomena, necessitating branches within sociology, including political sociology as an outgrowth of sociology that addresses political phenomena as a social superstructure.

B. Political Science: Gabriel Almond’s Definition: Gabriel Almond states that political science is the system of interactions that exist in all independent societies, performing functions of unity and adaptation while supporting them within and towards other societies, exercising these functions through coercive means—whether through full or partial legitimacy. The political system represents the legitimate values of societal security and is the legitimate creator of changes within it.

The emergence of political science as an independent discipline occurred in the mid-19th century and was initially considered a study of the state. The definition in the “LETTER” dictionary referred to it as the science of state governance. This idea was adopted by constitutional law pioneers who wrote on the theory of sovereignty. However, as political science evolved, it came to be viewed as a science of power, thanks in part to American contributions that transitioned political science from a state-focused discipline to one concerning authority and power. By the mid-20th century, the term “political science” lacked precision due to its overlap with political sciences, which encompass various branches of political thought, political science, and sociology. Nevertheless, UNESCO contributed to establishing political science’s rightful place, assigning a group of political scientists the mission to develop contemporary political science writings and determine the topics involved, which include political theory, political parties, social groups, and public opinion.

The Relationship between Political Science and Political Sociology: Political science concerns itself with power relationships within society and the political authority’s relationship with society, which overlaps with political sociology.

Definition of Political Sociology: The term political sociology was first officially mentioned on July 10, 1968. The events of 1968 in France contributed to its advancement, primarily due to the violent revolutions led by new forces that imposed a kind of adherence to methodologies, data collection, and analysis strategies. Given the abundance of opinions and definitions, we will focus on a few:

• Maurice Duverger defines political sociology, widely recognized in the West, as the science of power, authority, government, sovereignty, and leadership in all societies across all human groups.
• According to Lipset, political sociology is the study of political phenomena and systems in light of the prevailing social and cultural structure within society. In general, political sociology aims to analyze phenomena, conditions, and cultural and economic circumstances’ impact on social constructs. Thus, it addresses both formal and informal systems and engages with political phenomena as distinct superstructural phenomena.

Topics in Political Sociology: The field of political sociology encompasses subjects and personal materials that this science studies, investigating its theoretical and practical frameworks and scientific methodologies. Among the key topics studied are:

• The relationship of political sociology with branches and specialties of sociology, such as military sociology, urban sociology, legal sociology, and educational sociology.
• The methodology of political sociology and the scientific phenomena it employs for collecting information, facts, and scientific data, including historical methods, psychological methods, field survey methods, functional structural methods, and the logical relationship between political institutions.

The Emergence and Development of the State and Society: The state and its legitimate authority depend on various factors, including the rights and obligations of authority towards the people and vice versa. Types of authority include federal, charismatic, democratic, political behavior, mass psychology, and social groups in politics, political parties, ideologies, and various social and psychological factors that influence public opinion.

Scientific Preconditions for the Subject:

1. The subject is both theoretical and practical.
2. Laws and principles of political sociology are subject to increase and accumulation through research and studies conducted by specialists and are neither fixed nor limited.
3. The subject of political sociology is objective, characterized by describing and ascertaining the facts of society and politics without evaluating or criticizing them. It analyzes their stability and transformation.

Functions of Political Sociology: The functions of political sociology can be summarized as follows:

• Understanding and responding to the rules and principles of society that underpin political action and the foundations of political institutions. This involves diagnosing, analyzing, and interpreting the social and cultural factors that contribute to political stability and peace within society, as well as identifying social factors that cause political and social unrest and fracture the unity of the community.
• Studying the causes, nature, and outcomes of complex political phenomena through analytical and critical examination, tracking phenomena and linking institutions and political systems in terms of their emergence, development, structure, and functions concerning the society they exist in and interact with.

Objectives of Political Sociology: These can be distilled into two main aims:

1. Establishing academic scientific boundaries between political sociology and other social sciences.
2. Increasing specialists and researchers in the field of political sociology and expanding the scope of research within it.

Modern Theories in Political Sociology

B. Relative Functionalism (Robert Merton): Merton identifies the results or effects that can be observed, leading to adaptation and cohesion within a specific system. He developed a structured conceptual framework for functionalism, precisely articulating the essence of functional analysis and its reasoning procedures.

Merton’s theory begins with the idea that the concept of function is distinct from the notion of purpose. He differentiated between manifest functions and latent functions; the reasons individuals (voters) provide for their behavior differ from the outcomes of that behavior. The structure of the social system yields consequences that apply broadly, not just to the political system as a whole.

According to Merton, three key assumptions underpin functional analysis:

1. Social and cultural elements may serve functional roles for one group while being dysfunctional for another, or harmful for yet another (this is the structure).
   • Example: Within an economic institution with structural branches, certain elements may benefit the economic structure while harming the social and cultural structure.
   • Investments in developing countries serve a function for the economic system but can be detrimental to the political and cultural systems (interfering with domestic politics).
2. A single element may serve multiple functions: Various elements may perform one function—education, for instance, is fulfilled by a group of teachers, which is referred to as functional substitutes.
3. Defining the social units these functions serve: Are they social or cultural elements? Some elements may possess multiple functions, and some of their outcomes may be negative. (For example, working in multiple institutions can adversely affect their overall integrity).

Merton applied functional analysis in his examination of the social and cultural sources of deviant behavior, aiming to highlight the pressures exerted by social structures on individuals to engage in nonconforming (negative) behavior. He distinguished between two main elements he referred to as the cultural structure of society:

• Culturally defined goals.
• Systemic means to achieve these goals (along with methods to facilitate them, such as investing in theaters or providing resources to the public).

Merton argues that social structures yield diverse opportunities for individuals to pursue various behavioral patterns, thereby facilitating adaptation. Additionally, there are structural sources (cultural structures that encompass all political, economic, etc.) of behavior that normalize deviance.

Deviance occurs when individuals act in ways that are deemed expected within specific structural contexts. According to him, what is expected becomes the pinnacle of functional explanation (effects and implications). Merton discusses the American political machine in his book “Principles of Theory and Sociological Method” (1963), describing the machine’s function of attracting and retaining voters from the lower classes by providing material incentives unavailable from the state. He interprets this machine’s role as responding to unmet demands (perceived opposition).

Therefore, functionalism is built on the following principles:

• General functional needs can be satisfied in various ways, depending on the community’s nature, culture, and circumstances.
• Available options (alternatives) for satisfying societal needs are limited and are driven by humans’ biological realities (material). For instance, in times of crisis, one may find various options ranging from military intervention to other means.
• There is a relationship between these options, such as the correlation between political evolution and industrial development. Functional analysis relies on several measures:

First Measure: Theoretical experimentation, where one can mentally anticipate societal reactions to disturbances or normal performances (e.g., one might expect a person not to deviate because the family performs its function).

Second Measure: The comparative method in functional analysis, observing and analyzing the consequences of social disturbances (with an emphasis on negative aspects).

The Functional Theory of David Easton and Gabriel Almond:

David Easton’s foundational theory attempts to define the political system as a series of bounded interactions surrounded by social systems that continuously influence it. He does not concern himself with what happens within the “black box” but focuses on the relationships between the system and its environment—both internal and external.

Internal Environment: The systems constituting the broader social system—economic, cultural, religious, etc.

External Environment: Apart from social structures, this includes biological ecosystems, psychological systems, and international systems. Easton emphasizes the influences impacting the political system and the black box, which encompasses all outputs responding to external influences, focusing on the flow of actions and reactions between the environment and the political system.

To maintain equilibrium, a political system must balance two types of inputs—demands and support (backing). If demands escalate, the political system must either meet them, reduce their intensity, or ignore them; thus, it requires support for any decision undertaken to respond to the demands, which may involve establishing new legislation, providing clarity on issues, or implementing repressive measures like dissolving parties or banning demonstrations.

Easton identifies three core functions performed by any political system:

1. Expressing demands.
2. Regulating demands (organizing and classifying them); according to Gabriel Almond, this necessitates a committee to voice those demands.
3. Reducing or regulating demands.

Gabriel Almond defines the political system as a system of interactions found in all independent societies, fulfilling integration and adaptation functions within these systems and towards other societies through legitimate means of employment, coercive strategies albeit subtly or overtly.

In his book “Comparative Politics,” he analyzes political systems across three levels:

1. Capabilities: Any system must possess abilities that allow it to coordinate individual and collective behaviors via shared norms to prevent conflicts or serious contradictions. This capability is organizational.
   • A. Extractive Capacity: The system’s ability to procure essential resources from either internal or external environments—financial resources, political support, assistance.
   • B. Distributive Capacity: The system’s capability to equitably allocate the resources it has acquired among individuals and groups.
   • C. Responsive Capacity: The political system’s ability to address external pressures and demands to maintain equilibrium.
2. Transformative Functions: (from and to), where Almond examines distinct mechanisms through which the political system transforms demands into needs, outlining functions which include:
   • A. Expressing demands (from forces—civil society).
   • B. Aggregating all interests into common demands, simplifying and homogenizing them.

Many thinkers (Almond + Easton) also discuss government functions, which are also transformative:

• Legislative Function: Termed the “rule-making function.”
• Executive Function: Referred to as the “rule-implementing function,” representing the state’s highest apparatus.
• Judicial Function: Known as the “rule-enforcement function,” establishing and enforcing legal obligations.
• Communication Function: Referring to interactions between rulers and the ruled or among various components within the political system (local groups, economic institutions, civil society organizations, cultural centers).

3. Functions Maintaining and Adapting the System:
   • A. Political Selection Function: Identifying and selecting individuals for political roles while providing stances on specific political positions that move the system.
   • B. Political Socialization Function: Transmitting political culture to sustain supportive political culture (preparing society for political culture)—for instance, how H. B. Boumediene’s regime established a supportive political culture.

From Function to Coordination: Talcott Parsons is recognized as the main proponent of functional methodology, especially in social studies and political sociology, as he aligns with the structuralist approach before developing a systematic method. He theorizes the social act as comprising one or more actors, each representing a distinctive center or position with differentiated roles—organized forms governed by member relationships outlining their rights and obligations within shared norms and values alongside various cultural symbols and topics.

His systematic analysis relies on four core concepts:

1. Societal Action
2. Context
3. Actor
4. Action Orientation

Parsons emphasizes the functional role of structures in that systematic analysis requires methodical treatment of the roles and positions encompassed by a certain social context, as well as the organizational patterns involved in this context. The concept of position refers to the place or status of an actor in a specific social relationship viewed as a structure. Meanwhile, the role pertains to the behavior of the actor concerning others; hence, action may be viewed in light of its functional importance within a specific system, and organizational patterns define the structured expectations determining culturally appropriate behaviors for individuals undertaking various social roles. The interconnected array of the roles collectively forms the system, and the systemic perception of social action requires consideration of two primary observations:

1. The system includes five subsystems:
   • 1. The biological organismic system linked to the human instinct that drives social action and fulfills its needs.
   • 2. The metaphysical system as a source of a collective set of values serving as primary guides.
   • 3. The cultural system and values.
   • 4. The social system.
   • 5. The personality system.

Often, the organic system merges into the personality system, and the metaphysical system into the cultural values system, yielding three overarching systems:

1. The biological organismic system.
2. The metaphysical system.
3. The personality system.
4. Despite overlaps between the three systems, no system can exclusively revert to another but rather to the overall social action system, essential for understanding the internal interactions of any sub-systems and their functional performance within the broader social action system.

To identify elements of the social system, it must be appreciated from two critical perspectives:

• The Structural Aspect: Reviewing the nature of the three systems constituting the social action system.
• The Dynamic Aspect: Assessing the functional performance of each sub-system within the overarching social action system.

Parsons asserts that the internal relationships among these sub-systems are complex, as each system remains independent of the others, possessing its unique characteristics and activities compared to other systems; simultaneously, they are intertwined (mutual dependency at the fringes). For a system to maintain balance or continuity, it must respond to two types of needs and challenges, allowing it to organize necessary activities and push towards fulfillment. Thus, the social action system embodies various activities and functions, linking some to the system’s relations with its environment while associating others with its internal structural needs.

Parsons also perceives functions of action, distinguishing between objectives and available means for achieving those objectives, identifying four primary functions that the social system should follow:

1. Adaptation Function: Units of action working to align the political system with its external environment, meaning adaptation involves accessing resources exchanged for production occurring within the system, ordering, transforming, and equipping those resources for meeting the system’s needs.
2. Goal Achievement: All actions assisting in realizing the system’s goals mobilize resources and effort towards achieving those aims.
3. Integration Achievement: This function aims to ensure stability within the system, comprising actions that safeguard the system against unexpected changes and basic disturbances, ensuring cohesion and solidarity necessary for the system’s function. The social system bears responsibility for performing the integration function, establishing loyalty, defining boundaries for actions, and imposing pressures and hurdles against deviations.
4. Pattern Preservation Function: The social system requires various actions to motivate individuals, essentially involving the necessary desire, such that this function focuses on storing or accumulating incentives, prompting Parsons to term it Latent energy (the energy present in individuals) or maintaining a pattern.

Latent Energy: This refers to the drives or motivational energies of individuals within society to uphold their customs and traditions. In general, Parsons emphasizes the positives of this analysis within social phenomena, focusing on the issues of system stability and exploring factors establishing the foundational action and social interaction under relative stability. His concern for stability has led his critics to classify him as a conservative regarding the status quo, thus designating him an opponent of change and revolution.

In conclusion, functional analysis in its traditional form or systematic analysis as a development of functional analysis is more suitable for addressing political sociology, as it treats political phenomena as components of a broader system under mutual influence and support, relating the political system to its surrounding environment through various factors including:

• Adaptation
• Distribution
• Utilization
• Balance maintenance

This methodology clarifies the role of social factors in political decision-making processes and within the political system, indicating that comprehending any political system requires understanding its “cybernetic” cycle (from cybernetics, which studies transitions within material cells), focusing on interconnections among system components.

References

🧠 Classics & Foundational Texts

1. Max Weber – Economy and Society
   A foundational work in political sociology, offering core concepts like authority, bureaucracy, and legitimacy.
2. Karl Marx – The Communist Manifesto
   While not a textbook, it lays the ideological foundation for class analysis in political sociology.
3. Antonio Gramsci – Selections from the Prison Notebooks
   Introduces key concepts such as cultural hegemony and political leadership.
4. C. Wright Mills – The Power Elite
   An influential critique of the interlocking power structure in the U.S., with broad relevance.

📘 Introductory & Textbook-Style Works

5. Anthony M. Orum – Introduction to Political Sociology
   A widely used textbook offering a comprehensive overview of power, politics, and society.
6. William Domhoff – Who Rules America?
   An accessible analysis of elites and class dominance in American politics.
7. Kate Nash – Contemporary Political Sociology: Globalization, Politics, and Power
   Blends classical theory with modern issues like globalization and human rights.
8. Michael Rush & Philip Althoff – An Introduction to Political Sociology
   Focuses on institutions, political behavior, and the influence of ideology.

🌍 Global & Comparative Perspectives

9. Charles Tilly – Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990–1992
   A comparative historical analysis of state formation.
10. Theda Skocpol – States and Social Revolutions
    Explores how revolutions reshape state-society relations.
11. Seymour Martin Lipset – Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics
    A landmark study in understanding political behavior through sociological lenses.

🧩 Theory & Analytical Frameworks

12. Pierre Bourdieu – Language and Symbolic Power
    Offers insights into political authority, legitimacy, and power dynamics.
13. John Dryzek & Patrick Dunleavy – Theories of the Democratic State
    A theoretical exploration of different models of the state and governance.