Search

In contemporary American political thought the issue of memory and the dream of America have largely centered on Louis Hartz’s (1955) now classic The Liberal Tradition in America and scholarly reaction to its main thesis of the relentlessness of Lockean liberalism in American political discourse. As alluded to above memory serves to authorize an individual’s experience of and participation in the world. In a similar way collective memory authorizes the public/political sphere in which individuals must situate themselves and find a path in the company of others. This paper engages the question of authority in politics and the founding of the public sphere. The Hartzian thesis and Thomas Dumm’s (1987) elaboration of and reaction to it will map the terrain of American memory and the implications of that remembrance for the authorization of the dream of the American public sphere. With that in mind, I intend to explore the dimensions of a radically democratic rendering of that dream by Sheldon Wolin in his attempt to explode and multiply the narratives comprising collective memory and hence authorizing the public sphere in America, raising questions about the role remembrance has to play in our understandings of and hopes for politics. Through Arendt’s work on the nature and importance of authority in politics and her interpretation of the uniqueness of the American Revolution I hope to develop a critique of Wolin’s construal of remembrance and narrative as warrants for the creation of truly democratic political space. By way of a preview, the purpose at hand is not to discredit Wolin’s vision, but rather to deepen its meaning by probing what he leaves unattended to and what Arendt tantalizes us with--namely the centrality of emotion, of attachment, to founding the political realm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Which Supreme Court justice or justices are the most influential? Several scholars note that the Chief Justice plays an influential and the “median justice” is at an advantage in influencing the policy output of the Court. We argue for the existence of a “third position of influence”â€"that of the senior associate justice who votes in opposition to the Chief Justice. The reason for this is simple: when the Chief Justice is not in the majority, the senior associate assigns the majority opinion. We demonstrate this influence by using a simple spatial model and illustrate that this position has been filled by the current senior associate justice, John Paul Stevens. Additionally, we test empirically whether justices in a similar position shift their voting patterns in a manner consistent with our hypothesized model of utility maximizationOur research adds to the judicial politics literature in several ways. First, we see our research as an extension of the rational choice theory in judicial politics. Second, we suggest that Stevens’s shift from a conservative justice to the liberal most justice on the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts is less a shift of court personnel than a purposeful attempt to distinguish himself from the Chief Justice to gain leverage on the Court. Finally, we offer a different reason why justices other than the Chief Justice and the median justice may act strategically and appear to shift their “preferences” on the Supreme Court as their careers extend. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, in conjunction with historical findings of sharp and punctuated policy change, newer findings in gun control and U.S. state tobacco policy have found largely symbolic punctuated changes. What are the implications for future research in Punctuated Equilibrium theory? Since the 1980s, traditional pluralist analysis has evolved to a broader political process theory that examines key historical policy events, why advocacy coalitions cooperate, how advocacy coalitions frame causal stories, policy norms of governmental bodies, degree of influence by a social or public interest group movement and whether state repression of these movements occurred. These various independent variables can gauge the degree and extent that the attempt to punctuate equilibrium resulted in material, limited material or symbolic changes in public policy. Testing this combined policy analysis approach, I conclude that U.S. state tobacco policy making from 1990 to 2005 was characterized by limited material and symbolic punctuation that favored the pro-tobacco advocacy coalition's policy agenda with its framed story that tobacco is a legal product and adult choice. There was no significant state repression of these public interest anti-tobacco coalitions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The nonproliferation regime today is under siege from many directions. The US as the pre-eminent world power is currently engaged in efforts to modify the regime without striking at its fundamental principles. One such attempt was the July 2005 declaration signed by US President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. While this agreement has mixed implications for the health of the nonproliferation regime, my research suggests that the overall impact is likely to be minimal. This is because states acquire or give up nuclear weapons because of regional and domestic political factors or due to fear of US intervention. I also find that the nonproliferation regime is unable in its present state to accommodate rising powers such as India, which desire to behave responsibly towards the world. In this period of regional power transition, the regime needs to be adjusted accordingly. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focusing on county government in the United States, this study will evaluate a series of hypotheses testing the relationship between social capital (trust, optimism and civic engagement) and government performance. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Realist IR scholars have become increasingly committed to the canons of positivist social science. Contemporary realist theorizing largely presupposes a strict separation of subject and object, emphasizing ?theory testing? and ?prediction? as touchstones of social science. For example, Stephen Walt noted with satisfaction that security studies (which ?fits comfortably within the realist paradigm?) ?adopted the norms and objectives of social science,? including the development of theories and ?the testing [of} their predictions against a scientifically selected body of evidence.? And John Mearsheimer urged scholars to ?use their theories to make predictions about the future . . . The world can be used as a laboratory to decide which theories best explain international politics.? If the world is a laboratory, it is incumbent upon realist theorists to detach themselves from the political events anticipated by their theories in the same manner that, say, a chemist avoids intervening in the experimental processes underway in his lab. In practice, however, realist IR scholars often intervene in political reality. They consult national security agencies, whisper in the ears of decision makers, write op-ed pieces, give interviews, and sign petitions in an attempt to influence policy and shape political events. For example, in recent months realists of all stripes have engaged in an overt political campaign against U.S. policy in Iraq. In their actual practices, then, realist scholars attempt to construct and re-construct political reality without realizing that the very act of their political intervention subverts the neat subject-object separation presupposed by their theories. By abandoning positivist presuppositions and drawing instead on constructivist approaches that regard purpose and analysis as ?part and parcel of a single process? (E. H. Carr), realists could greatly reduce the dissonance between their epistemological principles and their actual practices. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question of whether policy makers learn from past experience is both a central and a vexing to students of foreign policy analysis. As Levy (1994) has noted, it is the latter because it is fraught with conceptual and methodological problems, but it is central because establishing the presence of learning would legitimate the idea that leadersÂ’ beliefs, cognitions and attitudes mattered when predicting the behavior of states in the international system. While some attempts have been made to systematically assess the impact of prior success or failure on foreign policy choices, most of these have focused on behavioral indicators of learning (i.e. change in strategy over time) rather than systematically assessing changes in the mental states of the decision makers. This analysis of the belief systems of US Presidents in response to crisis outcomes attempts to fill this void. The International Crisis Behavior project dataset provides a subset of crises for which we examine US behavior, target behavior and crisis outcomes. We use using the Verbs in Context system of content analysis to generate operational code indicators for the relevant US President before and after the crisis in order to establish whether congruence or disparity between each PresidentsÂ’ subjective representation of the situation and his anticipated behavior of the opponent interacts with outcome quality to reinforce or change his belief structures. We then determine whether Presidents exhibiting belief change are more likely to demonstrate learning by acting differently in the next crisis. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political theory deems race epiphenomenal. But race has become a foundation of the U.S. Applying Foucault?s theory, docility/utility and Marx?s theory of worker regulation presents a new discourse with which to understand race and its transformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]