Article Review on "American Political Culture and Values"

Article Review 6 pages (2005 words) Sources: 1+

[EXCERPT] . . . .

American Political Culture and Values

In Patterns of Support for Democratic and Capitalist Values in the United States, Chong et al. discuss America's political culture and values from the point-of-view that they are now and have historically been based in both democracy and capitalism. In fact, the authors make the point that, for Americans, these two values are so critical to the ideals of the United States that alternative beliefs have played only an insubstantial role in the American experience. They discuss the role that social learning theory plays in the acquisition of these societal norms and how different individuals assimilate societal norms at different rates. They believe that the social learning of a nation's norms can be broken down into three states: exposure, comprehension, and absorption / acceptance (Chong et al., 1983). The goal of their research was to try to gain a better understanding of how an individual's political awareness interacts with his or her social and psychological dispositions, and why some Americans systematically support capitalist and democratic values while others may reject them (Chong et al., 1983). To help explain this relationship, the authors drew upon results from a previously administered values study and tried to draw relationships between those different constructs.

The arguments in the resources were strongly based in American socio-political and economic history. There can be no real argument against the ideas that America's political system has been strongly democratic or that its economic system has been predominantly capitalist. The authors do not delve into the Red Scare and McCarthyism, but that backdrop necessarily informs any scholarship about democracy and capitalism. However, the author's arguments grow more specious as they try to describe how psychological and social factors influence the acquisition of political beliefs. That is not to suggest that their research model does not adequately measure and describe individual beliefs about democracy and capitalism or measure political awareness, because the research does seem to measure the constructs adequately. However, there appears to be a gap in measuring the constructs and explaining how those beliefs were acquired. In addition, the authors acknowledge individual conflicts in what is embodied in the two different terms.

Taken as a whole, the methodology in the article seemed haphazard and sloppy. The project simply seemed too large and unfocused to provide any concrete answers. They showed correlations in information, but when they attempted to determine causation from those correlations, the validity of the research seemed very questionable. For example, they state, "Our data show that people living in small communities are also more likely than urban residents to score low on political awareness (gamma = 0-26), and it is this fact which mainly accounts for their tendency to score low on both democracy and capitalism;"and one can see with this statement that they mistake correlation for causation, which is a critical error in any type of research.

In Beyond Tocqueville, please!, Jacqueline Stevens and Rogers Smith argue about the history of American ideology. Smith had previously written an article describing different ideologies that varied from liberalism, and Stevens criticized his failure to acknowledge that prior commentators, particularly W.E.B. DuBois, had mentioned the same ideas. Stevens openly suggests that Smith has both implicitly and explicitly taken those ideas as his own, and that his failure to cite the ideas of those who came before him signaled a problem, not simply with his scholarship but with all scholarship in the area because it generally ignores those ideas that have not dovetailed with mainstream American political ideology. She believes that Smith is claiming that American political scholarship has made two errors: first, that racism and sexism are not an intrinsic part of American political thought, but sidesteps; and second, that there is no real proof that ascriptive inegalitarian outlooks have been logically compatible with liberal democracies (1995). It is not that Stevens disagrees with Smith's point that racism and sexism have played critical roles in American political thought, but that she disagrees with the notion that this is a new idea and believes that prior researchers have established this standard. She then goes on to give numerous examples of prior research reflecting the same ideas that Smith discussed to prove her points that his thesis was unoriginal and that he failed to cite prior researchers who had mentioned similar ideas.

Smith's response is that he understands the motivation behind Steven's critique. He understands the concern that because his original article did not refer readers to related critiques, it may have reinforced the notion that those other critiques did not need to be read. However, he makes valid critiques of Steven's critique of his article. She seems to believe that he both narrowly defines mainstream scholarship and also that mainstream scholarship is too narrow. He also makes the point that simple space constraints meant that he could not delve into all prior authors who have mentioned similar concerns as the one he discussed. This is a very valid point, because it is impossible for any researcher to cite all prior research; it can be difficult for an individual to even be aware of all prior scholarship, much less incorporate that scholarship into his writing.

Without reading the original article, it is difficult to know whether Stevens or Smith are more persuasive. However, based simply on the critique, Smith is far more persuasive. Stevens' expectations of the article seem unrealistic; it is as if she wanted Smith to mention all scholarship that he would define as outside of the mainstream, while simultaneously arguing with his definition of mainstream. That simply is not possible in a limited-size article. Moreover, even if it were possible, it would lead to an unwieldy and unmanageable piece of scholarship that would deviate from the point of the article.

Looking at Smith's original article, Beyond Tocqueville, Myrdal, and Hartz: The multiple traditions in America, one is better able to evaluate Stevens' criticisms. Smith begins with the notion that American political reality, which has oftentimes benefitted from racial and sexual inequality, conflicts with stated American political ideology, with its focus on equality. He points out that several analysts have characterized American political culture as a modern liberal democracy and have largely ignored the fact that both minorities and females have been largely disenfranchised in this democracy.

He uses three preeminent analysts, Tocqueville, Myrdal, and Hartz, as his examples of modern liberal analysts and then uses various examples of how their ideologies have been disproven by the examples of unequal treatment both minorities and females in American society. He gives several very good examples of how propertied white men have run American political society and, though he does not use the word oligarchy, he does make a good argument that America is a form of oligarchy rather than a true democracy. Stevens' critiques that Smith's arguments are not wholly original are true, but his criticism that mainstream political analysis still adheres to this fallacy is supported by his article and not adequately challenged by Stevens' critique.

In Not all freedom is made in America, Eric Foner talks about the idea of American exporting freedom around the globe. He discusses this specifically in the context of the war in Iraq. He also talks about the idea that freedom, which is a very amorphous construct, was the goal of the war, but that the American approach to freedom, which is that America has somewhat of a monopoly on the concept of freedom, may no longer be applicable in the modern world.

Foner discusses the fact that freedom plays a critical role in American political self-image. The nation is built upon the ideal of freedom, despite having a significant history of routinely denying freedom and rights to different minority groups in American history. However, Foner's view of American politics seems to be lacking some depth. For example, he discusses the idea of the Civil War as a crusade to extend freedom to slaves. While no one can seriously argue that slavery did not play a major role in the Civil War, it is a serious error to confuse a conflict over slavery with a desire to abolish slavery because of the ideal of freedom. The conflict between the North and South began as an economic fight over power and this remained the case throughout the duration of the Civil War. For example, as many scholars have noted over time, the Emancipation Proclamation only freed those slaves that were in the Confederacy, even though there were slave holding states in the Union. Whether this reflects a misunderstanding on the part of Foner or his interpretation of how American ideology has reframed a historical dispute is not made clear in the article.

However, Foner is correct when he discusses the notion that America has long attempted to export freedom, at least in the 20th and 21st centuries. However, he also talks about the fact that the desire for freedom did not begin in America and that other people can desire freedom without being inspired by… READ MORE

How to Reference "American Political Culture and Values" Article Review in a Bibliography

Related Article Reviews:

American Exceptionalism Essay

American Exceptionalism refers to allegedly exceptional social and political destiny of Americans guided by Puritanical values of the early migrants. This concept is attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville who believed… read more

Essay 4 pages (1214 words) Sources: 5 Style: MLA Topic: American History / United States

---

Political Culture and Affirmative Action Essay

Political culture, political socialization, and identity politics converge in the debate about affirmative action in the United States. Political culture refers to the core values and beliefs about politics and… read more

Essay 4 pages (1212 words) Sources: 8 Style: MLA Topic: Government / Politics

---

Native American Expressive Culture Term Paper

Native American Expressive Culture

The Native American tradition can be seen as an evolving cultural tradition that encompasses countless expressions of creativity, from many varied cultures and expressions of culture.… read more

Term Paper 15 pages (4153 words) Sources: 15 Style: MLA Topic: Native American Indians

---

Impact of American Popular Culture Overseas Term Paper

Popular Culture

According to a senior intellectual the collapse of the Nation is based on the failure of the intellectual, cultural, political and economic policies of the state, it is… read more

Term Paper 15 pages (4214 words) Sources: 10 Style: MLA Topic: Anthropology / Culture

---

Most Powerful or Memorable Presentation of an American Myth Essay

American Myths

The flag is the most powerful symbol of patriotism for any country, and especially for the United States because the American flag is recognizable anywhere. With its stars… read more

Essay 4 pages (1384 words) Sources: 3 Style: MLA Topic: American History / United States

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>