Post-NAFTA Political Science in North America: Political Culture, Seymour Martin Lipset, and 'Continental Divides'

1997 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-174
Author(s):  
Paul Rich ◽  
Guillermo De Los Reyes
Author(s):  
Nonna Mayer ◽  
Vincent Tiberj

The boom in survey research, the increasing internationalization of political science, and the development of large-scale comparative projects have renewed the study of political culture and invalidated the notion of a French “exceptionalism.” But French scholars, influenced by Marxism, social history, and Bourdieu’s legacy of “critical sociology,” still have a different understanding of political culture, and prefer to use other concepts such as ideology. After a rapid overview of the founding studies and debates, this chapter shows how French research on political culture or cultures in the plural developed in its own way, and outlines the major challenges it is facing today on issues such as race and ethnicity, gender, globalization, and poverty.


2019 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kranert

Abstract The term populism is omnipresent in current political science and political discourse. This paper discusses how so-called “populist” discourse is linguistically construed in the 2017 election manifestos of the German Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) and the British United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP). It does so by operationalising populism concepts from political science, specifically the difference between exclusive and inclusive populism. In order to investigate how “populist” discourses depend on the respective political culture of a discourse community, these categories are employed in a corpus based comparative politico-linguistic analysis. Based on a corpus of German and British election manifestos from 2017, the paper demonstrates that both UKIP and the AfD combine elements of in inclusive populism based on demands of a democratic renewal, and an exclusive populism based on the idea the people as a homogeneous ethnos. The discursive realisation, however, differs because of general historic and political differences such as Britain being a state of four nations and the AfD aiming to avoid a rhetoric known from Germany’s past. Particularly pronounced are differences in the delineation to the enemy “European Union” as both parties link their euro-sceptical discourse to different central signifiers of the German and British political culture.


1982 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. L. Wade

A muddy pool, it is said, can pretend to any depth, an observation applicable to much of the revisionist liberalism now widespread in the academy. Unable for ideological or prudential reasons to accept, say, a conservative, classically liberal, or Marxist critique of modern society, but increasingly uncomfortable with the failure, as it is viewed, of bourgeois democracy, neoliberal system-builders have sought a synthesis of the “best” elements of socialist economics (yielding equality) and market relations (efficiency) within a “genuinely” democratic framework. The publication of Charles E. Lindblom's Politics and Markets is as an important auspice of this trend. Recipient of the American Political Science Association's most prestigious book award and laudatory comment in the journals of opinion, the volume has also sparked reaction in business circles, as in the Mobil Oil advertisement which took issue with Lindblom's analysis of big business' “privileged position” in the governance of the world's polyarchies (i.e., the “crippled” democracies of North America, Western Europe, Japan and related systems).


1975 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 467-469
Author(s):  
Andrew Sancton

In March 1973 this Journal published an article in which I attempted to show that section 51 of the British North America Act had been wrongly applied when seats in the House of Commons were allocated amongst the provinces as a result of the 1971 decennial census. I pointed out that my analysis was in conflict with that of the Representation Commissioner, the official having the legal duty to implement the section in question. In my penultimate paragraph I wrote: “There is a pressing need for some authoritative person or institution to analyse the present ambiguities and to decide which interpretation is correct and for what reasons. Alternatively the Canadian Parliament could clarify the situation by amending section 51 of the bna Act while at the same time retroactively applying the amended rules to the post-1971 redistribution.” While writing these words I actually expected that someone would take some interest in the problem I had discovered and would show me where I had erred. The reference to the bna Act was a theoretical flourish.More than two years after the publication of this article no one has shown my interpretation to be wrong, although Stanley Knowles has made a number of relevant comments. In general, however, it seems that nobody cared about an argument which was admittedly obscure and even legalistic (surely the ultimate sin in modern political science). Those constitutional lawyers who might have been exposed to the article were no doubt put off by the complicated arithmetic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document