An analysis of this history paper reveals that there are three theories involved. The three theories are the main ones, and cultures and they include functionalism, internationalism, and conflict. The theories have various similarities and differences depending on the institution, which in this case is the political institution. Each of the cultures and theories affects the individuals in the political institution differently. In a political institution or government, each of the theories and cultures has an effect on the approach to social change. This paper contains a full analysis and evaluation on the effect of each theory and culture on the views of the society (Berlin, 1967).
How each culture applies to political institution
Functionalism is a culture that offers a varying point of view to any political institution. The political institution could be a political party for different views and opinions. The application of internationalism in a political society is offering clarification for exceptional decisions since different grouping legislative body represents conflicting groups. The conflict theory seems a bit more noteworthy because it provides insight. They provided could be into the various raison detours that result to political transformation.
The culture effects on the approach to social change within a political institution
Functionalism primarily affects the loom to social change given that it opposes the formation of a one-world state. This situation is vibrant in the current world in that most of the institutions that deal with politics do not comply with international regulations when carrying out their operations. Many countries do not believe that the world can change to one state and still live happily. This means that many nations believe that the power of nations is the best and if they formed one world state, rights and freedom of populations would be undermined. All these issues directly concentrate on the functionalism theory and culture.
Internationalism has an enormous effect on the social transform. Everyone can now be able to comprehend why political representatives and political parties seem unusual at times. This comes, as a result, to dissimilar actors interacting in diverse ways to a different state of affairs. Once a society gets scrutiny from such an angle, adoption of social change becomes extremely fast and easy (Berlin, 1967).
Conflict theory is the most applicable one when it comes to explaining the result to social change in a political monarchy. Many authors claim that leaders who change things to favor them characterize the social order. When people try to act to the opposite of what these leaders dictate, they become deviants, which turn out to be punishable. Those in political institutions remain in power for long because they have the capability to decide how the society runs its errands. The latter explanation is applicable to the question of political evolution. The question of free enterprise in opposition to Marxism in political units bothers many societies. This comes because of many underprivileged members of the society voicing their complaints about how in effective their leaders are. The government regimes for that reason have many changes.
Those who believe in culture dictate that political leaders have created systems that ensure they are in power. The main reason as to why they do that is to hang on to their political positions. For them to do that, they must have experience in certain areas and financial back up. If one comes from that respective group, then the latter is achievable. Resistance to social change must occur to break down the domination by the political class in various institutions (Macy, 2002).
Culture effect on the view of individuals who are part of political institutions
Views of many political actors distortion come because of functionalism theory and culture. In functionalism, little or no defined set of rules and structures that help govern members of a given society. Those in the functionalism school of thought suppose that political functions should revolve on equity, justice, and not soundless principles like severe political structures. The functionalists alleged that the closing stages were better than the means. Many leaders in today’s world can depict these views. For example, during elections those entitled to vote look for representatives of the country instead of personality. This is the reason why minority groups get political positions in political office. Functionalism affects the minority group since they consider what effects the elected leaders would have on them and their entire lives (Berlin, 1967).
When it comes to interaction ism, it becomes possible to identify with the behaviors of political actors. This is evident when political leaders are running for the office; many of them attempt to portray their positive reflection. They interact with the audience during a campaign with the essence to change what the society thinks about the candidates. This makes the candidates work hard to become visible positively. They always do marvelous things in person in order to entice the crowd to vote for them pretending to be the opposite of their personalities (Miller, 2007)
In the field of politics, culture is highly influential. The divergence of the genders comes as the first grouping. Men hold most of the political positions in the political class. Because of this, a scenario emerges where women have to battle with other of the society in order to take their rightful place. Conflict theory has affected individuals in terms of class structures in political institutions. Various societies accept as true that people who belong to a certain class structures hold political positions. People from higher hierarchical systems represent the political class in many countries. It, therefore, means that those people who do not come from such systems consider themselves sidelined. For them to cope with the insufficiency of such approaches, and occurrence of conflict between these groups, conflict has to elope and seems indispensable. This explains why many people have negative feelings towards the political institutions they initially supported. It also explains why people rebel against their political institutions just to drive their point home (Ivancevich, et al., 2007).
Culture effect on the views of the society
In life, culture depicts itself in a number of situations in life. The best example is to look at many political parties changes in many countries. Five situations explain why change occurs as well as why it does not occur; conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreat ism, and rebellion. When an individual takes up a challenge presented to them with certain intellectual goals, and they happen to have the will as well as the capability, the will to achieve has a possibility of resulting to conformity. This depicts itself in societies where certain party systems dominate. Most political actors have obeyed the rules to their instructions, as a result. This is because, through the approach, they effectively achieve their cultural goals. Functionalism because of its innovativeness has affected people in the society on how they think and run their errands (Miller, 2007)
In the functionalism school of thought, ritualism has changed the way people view the social order. Theorists say that an individual may choose to take up to ritualism when their cultural goals change and still stick to the agreed methodology by society. Amongst all political actions, this is the most negative save for being common. Most of the political leaders take political positions following the promises to achieve certain goals, which turn out to be the opposite when in office. They forget whatever promises they made to the voters, and start their own agendas to benefit their own needs pretending to carry out national duties (Ivancevich, et al., 2007).
Retreat ism is another aspect in functionalism. It is the concept of neglecting goals and the means to achieve those goals. This is abundantly clear because as we speak, formation of coalition governments has become the new trend. As a theory, interaction ism has influenced many society’s views. The possible reasons behind that are that many political leaders especially from the western countries say that they oppose the class as a key driver in the society. This only happens during the campaign, and after that, they forget and practice what they initially opposed. Many members of the society have taken on this view. A big number of people in the society believe that the political leaders in political institutions cannot achieve all elements and that they can only achieve a few. It is up to individuals who want the other elements to work on them for their own moral. The place that political institutions have in lives of people is no longer there and instead, the concept of personal responsibility has taken place (Macy, 2002).
On realizing the power, they have as individuals; many people in different countries participate in electoral processes. Interaction ism has influenced many people to make unconventional choices when it comes to political decisions. For instance, presidents Barrack Obama taking power was because of interventionist ideas and thoughts. He was unconventional because of his experience in politics and race. Despite the differences, president Barrack Obama was able to interact with the voters and convince them to elect him. That is the reason he is now the forty-fifth president of the United States of America (Macy, 2002).
Four crucial assumptions found the conflict theory; competition, structural inequality, war and revolution. The relationships of human come because of competition. Human beings always compete for power, sexual partners or finance. The society plagued with structural inequality is the other assumption. This means that power can only be applicable to certain groups of people.
The way social change occurs is because of conflict theory. Functionalism has affected political subjects of life due to changes in government. Empowerment of many members of society is evident due to interaction ism theory and culture.
Ashley, D. (2005). Sociological theory. USA: Pearson Education.
Dungier, M. 2007. Introduction to Sociology. Sixth Edition. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
Macy, M. (2002). From Factors to Actors. Massachusetts: Computational Sociology and Agent Based Modeling.
Berlin, I. (1967). His Life and Environment. New York : Time Inc Book Division.
Miller, B. (2007). Cultural anthropology. (Ashford University ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn
Ivancevich, A. (2007). Organizational change. (Ashford University ed.). Boston, MA: