|
At
the beginning of class today, we will explore what various public opinion
polls have discovered about elite and mass attitudes in the US. Data from
a number of opinion polls are used. The tables you will see come from a
book entitled The American Ethos: Public Attitudes Toward Capitalism
and Democracy by McCloskey and Zaller. The book argues: "(i)t is
clear that capitalist and democratic values have strongly influenced the
course and character of American development, and that they continue to
serve as the authoritative values of the nation's political culture".
How does this statement "fit in" with ideas espoused by Monsma?
Schuman?
They go on to state: "(t)he
tension that exists between capitalist and democratic values is a
definitive feature of American life that has helped to shape the
ideological divisions of the nation's politics". Yet there is a great
deal in common between these two ideas. Louis Hartz argued, for example,
that capitalism and democracy combined to form a "liberal
tradition" that is fundamental to American history and experience.
Clinton Rossiter describes this liberal tradition as an American Holy Writ
whose articles of faith are: perfectability, progress, liberty, equality,
democracy and individualism. Historian Richard Hofstadter argued that
"...the major political traditions have shared a belief in the rights
of property, the philosophy of economic individualism, the values of
competition; they have accepted the economic virtues of capitalist culture
as necessary qualities of man".
Sound like what Schuman says the Founding Fathers
wanted us to think?
Interestingly, most also argue that the values of
capitalism and democracy, by their natures, creat conflict as well.
McCloskey and Zaller state: "Capitalism is primarily concerned with
maximizing private profit, while democracy aims at maximizing freedom,
equality and the public good. From this difference, others follow.
Capitalism tends to value each individual according to the scarcity of his
talents and his contribution to production; democracy attributes unique
but roughly equivalent value to all people. Capitalism stresses the need
for a reward system that encourages the most talented and industrious
individuals to earn and amass as much wealth as possible; democracy tries
to ensure that all people, even those who lack outstanding talents and
initiative, can at least gain a decent livelihood. Capitalism holds that
the free market is not only the most efficient but also the fairest
mechanism for distributing goods and services; democracy upholds the
rights of popular majorities to override market mechanisms when necessary
to alleviate social and economic distress. These differences are not
easily reconciled".
We'll look at this clash of values and the
differences between elites and mass.
Besides studying responses to specific questions on
public opinion polls which may also measure concepts such as sense of
civic duty or political efficacy, political scientists also like to
explore the interrelated sets of values, beliefs, attitudes and opinions
which form political ideologies. There can be a problem
however. It is the differences between how people may categorize
themselves and how they might be categorized if "objective"
measures of political ideology were applied to a set of questions.
This problem becomes even more pronounced in a society where there people
are generally not inclined to "think politically" and/or have no
frames of reference for the subtle distinctions which are part of the
notion of political ideology throughout the rest of the world. For
example, we tend to talk about conservatives, moderates, or
liberals. Can most Americans make the distinction, for example,
between a liberal and a neo-liberal? between a Marxist and a
democratic socialist? The answer is generally no. As a result
ideological terms can have little meaning. Let's try to explore this issue
in more detail.
First,
let's see how people self-identify themselves!
Distribution
of Ideological Identification: 1972-1996
from Political
Behavior and the American Electorate, Flanigan
and Zingale
|
1972 |
1974 |
1976 |
1978 |
1980 |
1982 |
1984 |
1986 |
1988 |
1990 |
1992 |
1994 |
1996 |
| Liberal |
9 |
13 |
8 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
9 |
11 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
8 |
9 |
Somewhat
Liberal |
10 |
8 |
8 |
10 |
9 |
8 |
9 |
11 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
8 |
11 |
Middle-of-
the-Road |
27 |
26 |
25 |
27 |
20 |
22 |
23 |
28 |
22 |
25 |
23 |
27 |
24 |
Somewhat
Conservative |
15 |
12 |
12 |
14 |
14 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
15 |
14 |
15 |
14 |
16 |
| Conservative |
12 |
14 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
14 |
15 |
15 |
17 |
12 |
15 |
21 |
19 |
Haven't Thought
About It |
28 |
27 |
33 |
27 |
36 |
36 |
30 |
25 |
30 |
33 |
27 |
22 |
21 |
What can
you surmise about changes in ideological self-identification over time?
Are there historical factors which
you can identify which might explain any changes which have occurred in
these patterns?
An assumption is always made that
the political parties have an ideological base. Let's explore that:
Ideological
Self-Identification and Party Identification: 1996
| |
Democrats |
Independents |
Republicans |
| Liberal |
16 |
7 |
2 |
25 |
| Middle-of-the Road |
12 |
13 |
6 |
31 |
| Conservative |
8 |
12 |
25 |
45 |
| |
36 |
32 |
33 |
101 |
What does this table suggest about the
competitiveness of political parties in the US? Their electoral
strategies?
How strongly held are
these ideological beliefs?
A study examined
individual responses to a range of questions and discovered the
following:
Levels of
Conceptualization: 1956-1988
Levels of
Conceptualization |
1956 |
1960 |
1964 |
1968 |
1972 |
1976 |
1980 |
1984 |
1988 |
| Ideologues |
12 |
19 |
27 |
26 |
22 |
21 |
21 |
19 |
18 |
| Group
Benefits |
42 |
31 |
27 |
24 |
27 |
26 |
31 |
26 |
36 |
Nature of
the Times |
24 |
26 |
20 |
29 |
34 |
30 |
30 |
35 |
25 |
| No issue content |
22 |
23 |
26 |
21 |
17 |
24 |
19 |
19 |
21 |
Ideologues:
discussed candidates and issues in ideological terms
Group Benefits: could discuss candidates
only in group terms, ie., "Democrats are for the working man or
"Republicans are good for business"
Nature of the Times: evaluations based
solely on the specifics of the moment
What does this table say about the
"state of ideology" in America?
| 