Political Entrepreneurship, Institutional Change, and American Political Development

Author(s):  
Adam D. Sheingate
2003 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-453
Author(s):  
Elisabeth S. Clemens

Although American Political Development is one of the more sociological corners of political science, for the most part sociologists have not been attuned to its contributions. Even among historical sociologists, the central conversations have been motivated by classic questions about transitions to capitalism and revolution in Europe rather than by puzzles of American exceptionalism.Much of political sociology has focused on individual voting behavior and public opinion; social movements research focuses heavily on the most recent decades in American history. Consequently, a review of the impact of Stephen Skowronek’s Building a New American State within sociology reveals a sharply delimited set of direct influences beyond the research already well known to scholars in American Political Development, largely the work of Theda Skocpol (1992) and her many students and collaborators (e.g., Orloff and Skocpol 1984). A rereading, by contrast, highlights the importance of the book for contemporary discussions of the forms and processes of institutional change.


Author(s):  
Andrew Karch

This essay contends that the American states merit a more prominent place in the study of American political development for both substantive and methodological reasons. It illustrates how the study of the states provides a more comprehensive portrayal of American politics and its evolution, offering new insights into the dynamics of institutional change, the expansion and restriction of voting rights, and the shifting contours of the American welfare state. Moreover, the states’ combination of fundamental similarity and manageable variation makes them especially well suited for evaluating causal arguments. Developmental scholars have generally not taken full advantage of the states as a research venue, but carefully designed studies of state politics have the potential to illuminate broader questions of political development.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-207
Author(s):  
Juliette Barbera

For decades, both incarceration and research on the topic have proliferated. Disciplines within the Western sciences have studied the topic of incarceration through their respective lenses. Decades of data reflect trends and consequences of the carceral state, and based on that data the various disciplines have put forth arguments as to how the trends and consequences are of relevance to their respective fields of study. The research trajectory of incarceration research, however, overlooks the assumptions behind punishment and control and their institutionalization that produce and maintain the carceral state and its study. This omission of assumptions facilitates a focus on outcomes that serve to reinforce Western perspectives, and it contributes to the overall stagnation in the incarceration research produced in Western disciplines. An assessment of the study of the carceral state within the mainstream of American Political Development in the political science discipline provides an example of how the research framework contributes to the overall stagnation, even though the framework of the subfield allows for an historical institutionalization perspective. The theoretical perspectives of Cedric J. Robinson reveal the limits of Western lenses to critically assess the state. The alternative framework he provides to challenge the limits imposed on research production by Western perspectives applies to the argument presented here concerning the limitations that hamper the study of the carceral state.


Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
H. Howell Williams

Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination and confirmation featured frequent references to her role as a mother. This article situates these references within the trajectory of American political development to demonstrate how motherhood operates as a mechanism for enforcing a white-centered racial order. Through a close analysis of both the history of politicized motherhood as well as Barrett’s nomination and confirmation hearings, I make a series of claims about motherhood and contemporary conservatism. First, conservatives stress the virtuousness of motherhood through a division between public and private spheres that valorizes the middle-class white mother. Second, conservatives emphasize certain mothering practices associated with the middle-class white family. Third, conservatives leverage an epistemological claim about the universality of mothering experiences to universalize white motherhood. Finally, this universalism obscures how motherhood operates as a site in which power distinguishes between good and bad mothers and allocates resources accordingly. By attending to what I call the “republican motherhood script” operating in contemporary conservatism, I argue that motherhood is an ideological apparatus for enforcing a racial order premised on white protectionism.


1987 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 337-342
Author(s):  
Eric Monkkonen

Samuel Kernell's article “The Early Nationalization of Political News in America,” in Studies in American Political Development: An Annual (1986), 1: 255–78, raises issues that are at once interesting and puzzling. He measures the number and length of all political articles in leading Cleveland newspapers through the middle decades of the nineteenth century in order to ask about the amount of newspaper attention paid to local, state, and national political issues. He observes that local issues were predominant only very early in the nineteenth century and that they declined quickly over time. Kernell concludes that politics nationalized far earlier than historians like Robert Wiebe had ever thought. Wiebe's “island communities” were gone by 1845. It is a clever piece of research of substantial significance.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sidney Tarrow

Movements and parties have given rise to two largely separates specialties in the social sciences. This Element is an effort to link the two literatures, using evidence from American political development. It identifies five relational mechanisms governing movement/party relations: two of them short term, two intermediate term, and one long-term. It closes with a reflection on the role of movement/party relations in democratization and for democratic resilience.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document