COMPARATIVE HISTORY OF POLITICAL SYSTEMS

The course aims at broadening and deepening the students' understanding of democracy through the study of twentieth-century European political history.

A good general knowledge of nineteenth- and twentieth-century history.

At the end of the course, students will be able to confront political issues from a historical viewpoint; to critically engage with historical sources – be they constitutions, political essays, or films –; to present their reflections in a structured and consistent form orally as well as in writing, and to defend them in front of instructors and classmates.

The course deals with the political history of European democracy since 1945: the foundation, or re-foundation, of Western European democracies after the war; the new constitutions; party systems; the evolution of the public sphere in the Sixties, Seventies and Eighties; the challenges of the new millennium. The study of historical events will be given coherence by adopting a long-term methodological and conceptual framework that considers political modernity in its entirety, starting from the late eighteenth century. A significant part of the course will be devoted to discussing a diverse array of sources in class, on the basis of student presentations.

There is no single textbook, but a number of readings for each week. Students will be expected to complete those readings before the lectures and classes. The readings will be the object of the final exam. They can be found at the following link: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ltylck7wtjvnpavhevs84/ACYa68DyFOoHkbg0JsNYtvg?rlkey=lvj0x3n5ajuya80mauh3sv0gw&dl=0 Students are expected to purchase G. Gerstle, The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order. America and the World in the Free Market Era, Oxford University Press, 2022.

Students are expected to read the assigned material before the classes and to actively participate in them. Class discussions will last 45 minutes and be led by a group presenting the historical document or book in 25 minutes. The remaining time will be dedicated to the debate.

Thursday meetings in weeks 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 will be devoted to group presentations. Groups of three to four students will have 25 minutes (not one minute more!) to present the given historical document or book. The presentation will be followed by a discussion. Groups must send presentations to the instructor by the previous Sunday, via Turnitin (assignment: Presentation outline). Presentations and participation in class will account for one third of the final grade. Presentation grades may not be refused. Presentation grades will remain valid for all exam sessions. On October 24, a written midterm exam will take place on the readings and lectures of weeks 1 to 5: one question to be answered in 45 minutes. Its grade will be valid only for those who take the final exam in the winter exam session. It will account for one third of the final vote. The written final exam, in the exam session, is worth the last third of the vote and will consist in one question on the readings and lectures of weeks 6 to 12, to be answered in 45 minutes. The midterm exam is not compulsory, and its grade can be refused. Students who have not taken the midterm or have refused its grade will answer two questions on the entire program in the written final exam, in 90 minutes. Final exam grades can be refused. In that case, however, it is not allowed to retake the exam in the same session. Students not attending the lectures (non frequentanti) will take the written final exam, consisting of two questions on the entire program to be answered in 90 minutes. The exam grade will account for two-thirds of the final grade. A 2000 words paper on one of the books discussed in class (Aron, Marcuse, Havel, Crozier et al., Lasch, Fukuyama, Huntington) will account for the last third of the final grade. The paper must be handed in via Turnitin three weeks before the date in which the student chooses to take the exam (assignment: Essay). When writing the paper, please bear in mind the following rules: 1. Respect academic forms. The paper must be divided in sections, and its introduction should present and motivate its structure. It must have references whenever necessary, in whatever format you prefer. 2. If possible, the paper should aim at demonstrating a thesis. E.g.: “Vaclav Havel’s moralism was an effective instrument to oppose post-totalitarianism but not (or: as well as) to rebuild a democracy”. If that is not possible, a well-argued and reasonably complete descriptive paper is also acceptable. 3. In building your argument, you should use the book that you have been given, but also reconstruct its context from other sources. When was the text produced, which were the intentions of its producers, at what did it aim, how was it received and what influence did it have, how did it stand the passing of time? www.turnitin.com class #45370126 Enrolment key CH202425