EBOOK DOWNLOAD (Neither Liberal nor Conservative) ë Donald R. Kinder

  • Paperback
  • 224
  • Neither Liberal nor Conservative
  • Donald R. Kinder
  • English
  • 06 April 2019
  • 9780226452456

Donald R. Kinder ñ 9 review

characters Neither Liberal nor Conservative review Neither Liberal nor Conservative 109 Free read ↠ E-book, or Kindle E-pub ñ Donald R. Kinder Congress is crippled by ideological conflict The political parties are polarized today than at any time since the Civil War Americans disagree fiercely about just about everything from terrorism and national security to taxes and government spending to immigration and gay marriageWell American elites disagree fiercely But average Americans do not This at least was the position staked out by Philip Converse in his famous essay on belief systems which d The main thesis of the book is that the American public is non ideologicalThe approach is 100% statistical and is based on data generated by the American National Election Study the world s longest running study of voters and electionsThe findings are as follows1 The way these studies measure it and the detail is provided and seems sensible barely a smidgen than one fifth of Americans have ever been ideologues 2 The chances an American will identify with an ideology rise in proportion to one s ability to answer a series of basic uestions about politics3 Elites those who engage deeply and seriously in political life do identify with ideology but seem to ignore that the base does not4 Ideological consistency across time on specific issues is abysmal5 That said Americans do feel strongly about issues and particularly so about identity issues women s rights issues etc and this explains to an outsider like me the uaint ritual incantation of what appear to non Americans to be uniuely American issues every four years6 Conservatives do not feel close to liberals and vice versa7 A uarter of Americans even when pushed refuse to grade themselves on the spectrum from liberal to conservative8 The one uarter of Americans who grade themselves as moderate on the spectrum from liberal to conservative are statistically indistinguishable from Americans who declare themselves as non ideologues on every single test the authors have run9 Very few Americans consider themselves very liberal or very conservative 10 Conversely the distribution from Democrat to Republican is very uniform11 There have consistently through time been conservative than liberal Americans12 Americans are significantly likely both to identify with a party than with an ideology and to show consistency in party preference across time13 Democrats are likely to be liberal and Republicans are likely to be conservative duh14 Americans who consider themselves to be ideological are slowly dwindling in numbers15 Conversely Americans who identify strongly with a party have been increasing in numbers16 Liberals think less of conservatives and vice versa but no less than fifty years ago17 Democrats and Republicans on the other hand have been growing apart in how they rate each other over the past fifty years18 Consistency between party identification and ideological identification has almost doubled over the past forty years19 Americans will change their ideological identification to correspond to their partisanship20 Ideology is for Americans the result of experience for example the emergence of an important politician the result of a major crisis or a response to social identity not a cause of participation in political lifeThe authors leave things there but obviously for me this has merely been a starting point for all sorts of thoughts that I summarize here but which you won t find in the book and are thus technically not part of the book reviewAs a European raised in a country where I got to experience freuent political demonstrations tear gas all night TV debates etc I thought these findings were rather disturbingOn the other hand I have always felt that the split between liberal and conservative in American politics is a very hard to swallow set menu where neither of the two represents at all how I for example think Somebody please explain to me why I cannot both believe in free markets and in adeuate taxation to provide a basic safety net for exampleSo perhaps people are simply refusing to be pigeon holed into one of those two categories and would be happier to identify with less proscriptive ideologiesAlso and again speaking from experience I find it much easier to express how I feel about issues than to see how my sundry views come together to form a consistent ideology A less benign interpretation could be that Americans are so busy working to keep their head above water that they do not have the luxury to think along the lines of an ideology A bit like we observe in today s nominally communist but practically oligarchic China it could be that the American worker may only have the bandwidth to concentrate on one or two political issues that are close to home and seek to get ahead via partisanshipThe 180 degrees opposite interpretation would be that the subject of serious political debate in the rest of the world redistribution is a closed case in the US where the population has felt affluent enough to put such thoughts to one side only leaving room for the uniuely American political neuroses we Europeans get to laugh about every four years such as threats to Roe vs Wade the composition of the Supreme Court gun control etcBut I digress In summary much as it cannot be any better than the numbers it s having to work with this is a totally fascinating set of statistical findings I m very happy I read it And I can 100% understand that the authors would not want to move from the undisputable econometrics they present to wild speculation of the kind I m engaging in here

characters Neither Liberal nor Conservative

Neither Liberal nor Conservative

characters Neither Liberal nor Conservative review Neither Liberal nor Conservative 109 Free read ↠ E-book, or Kindle E-pub ñ Donald R. Kinder Ical elites show up as scattered skirmishes in the general public if they show up at all If ideology is out of reach for all but a few who are deeply and seriously engaged in political life how do Americans decide whom to elect president; whether affirmative action is good or badKinder and Kalmoe offer a persuasive group centered answer Political preferences arise less from ideological differences than from the attachments and antagonisms of group lif In this book Kinder Kalmoe pay their utmost tribute to Phillip E Converse whom they call a scholar unsurpassed In particular authors respond to Converse s 1964 essay The nature of belief systems in mass publics by reiterating and somewhat updating his thesis about Americans being innocent of ideology using newer rounds of American National Election Studies ANES dataThis is a particularly relevant piece these days when many shortcomings of American politics are explained by the buzzword polarization Kinder Kalmoe reject this claim and argue that ideological polarization is pertinent to parties politicians and media elites while the general public as Converse stated than 50 years ago actually remains rather homogenous in their political beliefs A standard modern day American Kinder Kalmoe say is a conservative Democrat Thus ideology doesn t predict partisanship another common misconception Parties are material realities in a way that ideologies are not p 133Rejecting ideology as a useful system of belief organizing system in their concluding chapter Kinder Kalmoe suggest that dichotomous in group and out group identification is a fruitful and relevant research avenue in further explaining American political behavior Citizens for and against immigration pro life and pro choice proponents urban and rural divisions you name it This is perhaps where we even see polarization growing However Kinder Kalmoe don t take us further away from here which is somewhat unsatisfying Confirming Converse s thesis and THEN developing their alternative not just proposing it in last several pages would ve perhaps resulted in something seminal in the field not just in an echo of Converse 1964 A well written echo thoughOn a nerdier note can we all agree that data analysis in this book is beautiful Primarily it s because of simplicity just some descriptives correlations and OLS with ordered probit here and there Control variables are even excluded from final reported models they were used nevertheless and mentioned as notes in these tables A lot of people tend to overcomplicate things in the field and their analyses become method rather than theory driven so yeah focused analysis Yeah parsimony

Free read ↠ E-book, or Kindle E-pub ñ Donald R. Kinder

characters Neither Liberal nor Conservative review Neither Liberal nor Conservative 109 Free read ↠ E-book, or Kindle E-pub ñ Donald R. Kinder Rew on surveys carried out during the Eisenhower Era to conclude that most Americans were innocent of ideologyIn Neither Liberal nor Conservative Donald Kinder and Nathan Kalmoe argue that ideological innocence applies nearly as well to the current state of American public opinion Real liberals and real conservatives are found in impressive numbers only among those who are deeply engaged in political life The ideological battles between American polit One of my goals this year is to read a little of the original political science research I ve seen referenced a lot in op eds and online discussions I m not a political scientist so I can t judge the research my ratingcomments reflect my experience of reading this academic work as a general readerKinder and Kalmoe s book was a great place to start my project as it s very accessible for the non experts with an enjoyable conversational tone This clear and fairly non jargony style should be a model for other researchers who want to reach the wider public I have zero knowledge of statistical methods so I largely ignored the tables and focused on their discussion They are extending the work of a seminal 1960s essay by Philip Converse arguing that few Americans have an ideological identity Few consistently identify themselves as liberal or conservatives Moderate is not an ideological position but a refusal to choose Instead they re partisan not because they understand the ideological positions of their party but usually for reasons of group identity race class gender religion Only a small group of well informed people have consistent and enduring ideological views that provide a framework for their issue positions and voting choices Most people change their ideological label and issue positions much easily than their party identification The argument over whether ideology is the source of voters choices and issue positions has Kinder and Kalmoe say been going on for a long time but it isn t the answer and it s time for the field to pay attention to other reasons for howwhy people make political choices One thing I wondered reading this and which they don t address is whether the accuracy of information matters If you pay a lot of attention to politics but your information comes from a one sided andor freuently inaccurate source how does that affect this I suspect it depends on whether your outlet of choice is partisan or ideological I found the book interesting but for non expert purposes the working out of all the argument details can begin to seem repetitive If you re interested in Kinder and Kalmoe s high level conclusions Vox has a pretty good summary