John D. Lees, The Political System of the United States (London: Faber and Faber, 1969, 60s.). Pp. 366.

1970 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-138
Author(s):  
H. G. Nicholas
Author(s):  
John L. Campbell ◽  
Ove K. Pedersen

This chapter discusses how the United States experienced a crisis of partisanship that was marked by a continuing escalation in ideological rancor, polarization, and divisiveness in Washington. This entailed the proliferation of a more competitive and often contentious set of private policy research organizations thanks to numerous sources of tax deductible private funding from corporations and wealthy individuals, and a fragmented and porous political system. Paradoxically, as the crisis of partisanship reached an unprecedented level in the late 1990s and early 2000s, cooperation among some of these organizations broke out across the political divide due to the efforts of those who sensed the disastrous consequences of such mean-spirited partisanship for the country and for the credibility of their research organizations.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karam Dana ◽  
Bryan Wilcox-Archuleta ◽  
Matt Barreto

AbstractDespite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, popular perceptions in the United States, especially among political elites, continue to believe that religious Muslims oppose American democratic traditions and values. While many studies find positive relationships between mosque attendance and civic participation among U.S. Muslims, an empirical and theoretical puzzle continues to exist. What is missing is research that examines the relationships between the multi-dimensional concept of religiosity and how this is associated with public opinion and attitudes towards the American political system among Muslim Americans. Using a unique national survey of Muslim Americans, we find a positive relationship between religious beliefs, behavior, and belonging and perceptions of compatibility with American democratic traditions. Quite simply, the most religious are the most likely to believe in political integration in the United States.


Significance The National Liberation Front (FLN) and Democratic National Rally (RND) received the most seats, as expected, amid widespread voter apathy. Impacts The government will continue its austerity strategy in response to the low oil price, and face more social tension and protests. The young generation will lose even more trust in the political system and opt for protest, resignation and emigration. The supporters of security and economic cooperation with the United States within the regime were strengthened.


Daedalus ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 145 (3) ◽  
pp. 8-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nannerl O. Keohane

The goal of this essay is to clarify the relationship between leadership and equality as two essential constitutive factors of a democratic political system. The essay is motivated by concern about increasing inequalities in the political system of the United States and other countries that describe themselves as democracies. The first section notes the logical tension between leadership and equality, and spells out my understanding of the key terms I use in this essay. I show how the tension between leadership and equality poses a conundrum for democratic governance. Yet the crux of my argument is that profound socioeconomic inequalities pose the more basic threat. I identify disparities in power, as distinct from leadership, as the root of the problem here. Leadership and power are often conflated. Eliding the differences between the two impedes our understanding of the dilemmas we face. The classical answer to concerns about the abuse of power is to establish institutional constraints on political leadership. Yet good leadership is essential in solving the problems we confront. Because leaders can take significant steps to reduce inequality, leadership and equality are not always in tension. If we are to emerge from our current malaise, we must recognize and draw upon the positive contributions of leadership to efficacious democratic governance.


Author(s):  
D. B. Grafov

The article is about how pro-Israel and pro-China interest groups try to lobby on the ground of Capitol, White House and executive branch. The study of the lobbying results is based on «General theory of action» T. Parsons. It is concluded that for lobbying interests the main point will be the representation of the interests in the political and public spaces and the creating of advocacy and lobbying infrastructure. The ability of the Israeli lobby to achieve the goal can be explained, firstly, by political inclusion in the decision-making process, and, secondly, by almost axiomatic representation Israel interests through the national interests of the United States. The Israeli lobby can be considered as the religious lobby. It can use the possibilities of Jewish religious organizations in grass root action. Also this gives the opportunity to avoid the requirements of the LDA. From the point of view of the theory of Talcott Parsons, the success of the Israeli lobby is the cause of the action of a large number of actors that may form in large groups. Another advantage of the Israeli lobby is the ability of its members to get relevant information about the current situation in different spheres of political life in the U.S. The objective of the present study was to reveal the ways in which China lobby succeeds. The influence of China lobby on decision-making process in the United States can be explained through strong economic ties between American corporations and the Chinese market. When lobbying China uses numerous Chinese Diaspora in many States, as well as trying to interest of the former high-ranking American officials, granting them special privileges for doing business in China. In comparison to the Israeli lobby, the Chinese lobby has weaknesses. Chinese interest groups are not included in the political system of the USA and this is the disadvantage of the Chinese way of lobbying. Unlike Israel lobby Chinese one is external. The interests of the chinese pressure groups do not coincide with American national interests. Their actors are not rooted in the American political system.


Author(s):  
Simone Zurbuchen

This chapter aims to explain why considering Vattel as a founding father of positivism rests on a misunderstanding. Despite the continuous attention Vattel received in the scholarly literature as well as in the diplomatic and juridical practice, especially in the United States, his legacy remained highly contested ever since his treatise The Law of Nations was first published in 1758. One reason is its indebtedness to the modern natural law tradition but also to Vattel’s originality, mainly due to the significance he attributed to the sovereign state as a free and independent member of the society of nations. Vattel established many dualisms to develop his very broad notion of the law of nations: he applied the law of nations to the ‘political system’ of Europe, which he considered a kind of republic instituted for maintaining order and liberty and founded on the scheme of the balance of power.


Author(s):  
Charles S. Bullock ◽  
Charles M. Lamb

This chapter surveys the literature on racial discrimination and segregation in education and housing in the United States. It indicates that federal governmental institutions ultimately led the way in outlawing school segregation and some of the practices that created or maintained racially separate neighborhoods. Yet research also shows that much more progress has been made at enforcing federal legal standards during particular periods of time than others, as the political system has vacillated between the need to ensure equal opportunity and the desire to maintain aspects of past segregation. Recent studies demonstrate that school and housing segregation have declined, depending on the school district or housing market being examined. However, because segregated schools and housing patterns are still widespread in much of the country, both subjects continue to be fruitful areas for research.


2021 ◽  
pp. 119-144
Author(s):  
Karla Vermeulen

The chapter “Mistrusting Authorities in an Unstable World” examines how members of Generation Disaster engage with the political system today, having grown up in a post-9/11, wartime climate when many felt lied to or misrepresented by politicians and other authorities. That was followed by the extreme divisiveness of U.S. politics in general during their adolescence and as they moved into emerging adulthood. While some have chosen to disengage entirely, others have been moved to protest, vote at record levels, and generally continue the tradition of trying to recapture power from older people they feel aren’t representing them adequately. The importance of civic engagement as a marker of adulthood, and the history of social movements in the United States, are also discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-38
Author(s):  
Yaroslav Samarin ◽  

This article examines the role of popular culture products as a factor in changing the concept of patriotism in the United States. The discourse of patriotism is formed through a “sum” of images including an assessment of the political system, values and national history. According to American sociologist Jeffrey Alexander, “gaining power depends on the outcome of struggles for symbolic domination in the civil sphere”. The exacerbation in the last decade of problems related to race, gender and social justice led to a split in society and created the demand for a critical revision of the history of the United States, and as result the revision of the concept of patriotism. Nowadays, more and more graphic novels and media-shows based on patriotism are focusing on issues of social justice, and play an important role in the “culture wars” in the United States. An example of this is the popular series “Watchmen”, which has received various influential awards. Through the plot about superheroes, its authors construct a new narrative of civic patriotism. This narrative assumes that the racial issue has been a key factor in US history and that the country was founded on the principles of intolerance and oppression. In addition, it is suggested that the political system, in turn, is only formally democratic and the founding fathers created a state that is prone to authoritarianism and suppression, regardless of which political party is in power. Therefore, radical reforms are required for the United States to become a truly democratic and inclusive country.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document