Search

This paper articulates the relationship between social science and critical theory in a problem-oriented approach and how that approach can best promote the end of racial democratization in the case of the US. I discuss the role of social science in identifying and constituting the publics to which critique is addressed and the relation of both dominant and subordinate racial groups to the possibility of racial democratization. In particular, I advocate that critical theory should give more attention to the sources of racial hierarchy within white practice and the contradictions experienced by racial elites within that practice. These instabilities within racial hierarchy, as experienced by agents, can provide practical reasons for elites to participate in a politics of racial democratization. This attempts to address the under-theorized questions of how dominant publics relate to critical theory?s practical interest in social change and how stable egalitarian advancements are achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The theme of motion is prominent throughout Tocqueville’s Democracy in America. In the chapter on the real advantages that American society derives from the government of democracy, Tocqueville makes the following observation: "When one passes from a free country into another that is not, one is struck by a very extraordinary spectacle: there, all is activity and movement; here, all seems calm and immobile." Whether the activity and movement-the motion-of the people be a confused clamor, a thousand voices, a gathering of neighbors, an assembling of citizens, Tocqueville identifies this activity as one of the great benefits of democratic government. "This agitation, constantly reborn, that the government of democracy has introduced into the political world, passes afterwards into civil society. I do not know if, all in all, that is not the greatest advantage of democratic government, and I praise it much more because of what it causes to be done than for what it does" (DA I.2.6). The success of a democracy rests in large part on the motion of the people. Their active participation in township government, political and civil associations, jury service, and commerce provides opportunities for the people to learn to govern themselves and participate in a meaningful way in the governing process. Yet this constant motion of the people also has disadvantages that have an impact on many facets of the lives of those living in a democracy. For example the continual movement of the people breaks or relaxes the bond with prior generations. The individualism that originates in democratic societies can also lead to selfishness. To reflect further on the topic of the challenge that the motion of the people in a democracy presents, I propose first to explain how motion is present in Democracy in America, discuss how the motion of the people makes a positive contribution to democracy, identify the challenges that accompany this agitation in society, consider the ensuing consequences if the motion of the people is threatened, and finally to explore what type of balance can be struck between motion and rest in a democratic society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After the 1948, when Truman's victory over Dewey surprised the public and the pollsters, public opinion polling faced a legitimacy crisis. As this paper shows, nascent survey researchers played an important role in helping pollsters to survive and prosper. In discussing academics' efforts to preserve polling for social science and democracy, this paper adds to scholarly knowledge about the growing legitimation and use of public opinion polls for measuring public opinion as well as shifts in political science and other social sciences. The paper draws from oral histories of academic survey pioneers and leading pollsters, as well as contemporaneous publications, reports, and unpublished letters and memos. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]