Pub Date : 2024-05-03DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000537
J. Schlosser
{"title":"Plato’s Second Republic: An Essay on the Laws. By André Laks. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2022. 296p. $35.00 cloth. - \u0000Of Rule and Office: Plato’s Ideas of the Political. By Melissa Lane. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2023. 480p. $49.95 cloth.","authors":"J. Schlosser","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000537","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000537","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141016340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-01DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000598
Renanah Miles Joyce, V. P. Fortna
Extremism and terrorism are thought to go hand in hand in civil wars. Yet do they? Are rebel groups with more extreme goals more likely than moderate ones to use terrorism, as commonly assumed? Arguments linking extremism to terrorism are often circular: groups are tagged as extremist because they do extreme things. Our article addresses this problem by articulating a novel conceptualization of extremism as the distance of group goals from the status quo. Understanding the relationship between what groups want and how they try to achieve it has obvious theoretical and policy implications. We theorize mechanisms that might connect extremist goals to terrorism and use new data on rebel group aims in civil wars from 1970 to 2013 to examine the empirical relationship between extremism and terrorism in a nontautological way. The results show that some extremist goals are associated with terrorism but not others. Groups with goals that involve changing the political ideology of the state or transforming political power across identity groups are more likely to use terrorism or to use more of it. Secessionist groups, however, are no more likely to produce terrorism than are those with less extreme territorial aims such as autonomy.
{"title":"Extremism and Terrorism: Rebel Goals and Tactics in Civil Wars","authors":"Renanah Miles Joyce, V. P. Fortna","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000598","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000598","url":null,"abstract":"Extremism and terrorism are thought to go hand in hand in civil wars. Yet do they? Are rebel groups with more extreme goals more likely than moderate ones to use terrorism, as commonly assumed? Arguments linking extremism to terrorism are often circular: groups are tagged as extremist because they do extreme things. Our article addresses this problem by articulating a novel conceptualization of extremism as the distance of group goals from the status quo. Understanding the relationship between what groups want and how they try to achieve it has obvious theoretical and policy implications. We theorize mechanisms that might connect extremist goals to terrorism and use new data on rebel group aims in civil wars from 1970 to 2013 to examine the empirical relationship between extremism and terrorism in a nontautological way. The results show that some extremist goals are associated with terrorism but not others. Groups with goals that involve changing the political ideology of the state or transforming political power across identity groups are more likely to use terrorism or to use more of it. Secessionist groups, however, are no more likely to produce terrorism than are those with less extreme territorial aims such as autonomy.","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141048538","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-23DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000057
Tamir Moustafa
From 1965 to 2020, the National Science Foundation constituted the single largest funding source for political science research. As such, the NSF played a central role in defining the cutting-edge of our discipline. This study draws on historical records of the American Political Science Association to examine the political and administrative contexts that shaped the funding priorities of the NSF Political Science Program. Additionally, the study presents a new dataset and analysis of the nearly three thousand projects funded over the 55-year life of the program. The dataset shows that NSF funding was principally channeled toward quantitative research, whereas qualitative methods received little support, and work advancing normative, critical, or interpretive approaches received virtually no support. The archival record and awards-level data make visible the material forces that shaped knowledge production, and they underline the NSF’s instrumental role in consolidating behavioralism and marginalizing non-positivist approaches. The study sheds new light on the history of the discipline and helps to contextualize some of the distinctive features of American political science.
{"title":"Political Science as a Dependent Variable: The National Science Foundation and the Shaping of a Discipline","authors":"Tamir Moustafa","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000057","url":null,"abstract":"From 1965 to 2020, the National Science Foundation constituted the single largest funding source for political science research. As such, the NSF played a central role in defining the cutting-edge of our discipline. This study draws on historical records of the American Political Science Association to examine the political and administrative contexts that shaped the funding priorities of the NSF Political Science Program. Additionally, the study presents a new dataset and analysis of the nearly three thousand projects funded over the 55-year life of the program. The dataset shows that NSF funding was principally channeled toward quantitative research, whereas qualitative methods received little support, and work advancing normative, critical, or interpretive approaches received virtually no support. The archival record and awards-level data make visible the material forces that shaped knowledge production, and they underline the NSF’s instrumental role in consolidating behavioralism and marginalizing non-positivist approaches. The study sheds new light on the history of the discipline and helps to contextualize some of the distinctive features of American political science.","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140667121","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-22DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000653
Hernán Flom
Most analyses of the intersection of police, politics, and violence—which center on the police’s use of force as a means to control subordinate classes, repress political dissidents, or confront non-state armed actors—conceptualize the police as an instrument of political incumbents. In this paper, I problematize the relationship between the police and its political principals by focusing on how police administer violence as a political response in compliance or defiance of political incumbents. While elected officials may enact policy changes that restrain or incite police violence, police forces can either abide with or disregard these directives. Building on this interaction of policy shifts and police responses, I develop a typology of four variants of police administration of violence: peacekeeping, punishing, shirking, and sabotaging. I illustrate this typology with various examples from developed and developing democracies.
{"title":"Voting with Their Guns: An Integrated Framework of How Police Politically Administer Violence","authors":"Hernán Flom","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000653","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000653","url":null,"abstract":"Most analyses of the intersection of police, politics, and violence—which center on the police’s use of force as a means to control subordinate classes, repress political dissidents, or confront non-state armed actors—conceptualize the police as an instrument of political incumbents. In this paper, I problematize the relationship between the police and its political principals by focusing on how police administer violence as a political response in compliance or defiance of political incumbents. While elected officials may enact policy changes that restrain or incite police violence, police forces can either abide with or disregard these directives. Building on this interaction of policy shifts and police responses, I develop a typology of four variants of police administration of violence: peacekeeping, punishing, shirking, and sabotaging. I illustrate this typology with various examples from developed and developing democracies.","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140672721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-22DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000434
Sebastian Jungkunz, Julia Weiss
While the origins and consequences of populist attitudes in adults are being studied extensively, it is still unknown when populist attitudes might emerge in a person’s life. Drawing on the existing literature on political socialization, we focus on populist attitudes during adolescence and explore the contributing role of negative relationships with parents, peers, and teachers. We provide the first comprehensive analysis of populist attitudes among a representative sample of children aged 12 to 18 (mean: 14.66 years) using a unique dataset gathered through interviews conducted in schools in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland (n=3,123). Our findings reveal a strong association between perceived unjust teacher behavior and the level of populist attitudes in adolescents, while the connection of peers and parents with populist attitudes appears to be limited. Further analyses using panel data from the UK support these findings.
{"title":"Populist Attitudes among Teenagers: How Negative Relationships with Socialization Agents Are Linked to Populist Attitudes","authors":"Sebastian Jungkunz, Julia Weiss","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000434","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000434","url":null,"abstract":"While the origins and consequences of populist attitudes in adults are being studied extensively, it is still unknown when populist attitudes might emerge in a person’s life. Drawing on the existing literature on political socialization, we focus on populist attitudes during adolescence and explore the contributing role of negative relationships with parents, peers, and teachers. We provide the first comprehensive analysis of populist attitudes among a representative sample of children aged 12 to 18 (mean: 14.66 years) using a unique dataset gathered through interviews conducted in schools in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland (n=3,123). Our findings reveal a strong association between perceived unjust teacher behavior and the level of populist attitudes in adolescents, while the connection of peers and parents with populist attitudes appears to be limited. Further analyses using panel data from the UK support these findings.","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140674117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-16DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000525
Christian F. Rostbøll
It is widely agreed that the increased polarization many countries experience is bad for democracy. However, existing assessments of how polarization affects democracy operate with simplified understandings of both polarization and democracy. Bringing empirical studies and democratic theory into dialogue, I argue that polarization cannot be understood as a single phenomenon that can be evaluated in one way. Moreover, its different kinds affect different parts of the democratic system in distinct ways. First, we must distinguish between the degree of polarization in a given context and the different kinds of polarization at play. Second, we must consider whether people have good reasons for their polarizing behavior or whether it is entirely irrational. If people have good reasons for their polarizing behavior, the problem lies elsewhere than in polarization itself. Third, we must distinguish between the content of polarized opinions and the process of opinion formation. Both can be assessed with democratic criteria, but they raise different questions. Finally, for democratic evaluation it matters where polarization occurs and thus, we must differentiate between different sites of polarization: civil society, election campaigns, and legislatures. I recommend a systemic approach to assessing the democratic implication of polarization, which analyzes both the effects of polarization at different sites and on democracy as a composite whole.
{"title":"Polarization and the Democratic System: Kinds, Reasons, and Sites","authors":"Christian F. Rostbøll","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000525","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000525","url":null,"abstract":"It is widely agreed that the increased polarization many countries experience is bad for democracy. However, existing assessments of how polarization affects democracy operate with simplified understandings of both polarization and democracy. Bringing empirical studies and democratic theory into dialogue, I argue that polarization cannot be understood as a single phenomenon that can be evaluated in one way. Moreover, its different kinds affect different parts of the democratic system in distinct ways. First, we must distinguish between the degree of polarization in a given context and the different kinds of polarization at play. Second, we must consider whether people have good reasons for their polarizing behavior or whether it is entirely irrational. If people have good reasons for their polarizing behavior, the problem lies elsewhere than in polarization itself. Third, we must distinguish between the content of polarized opinions and the process of opinion formation. Both can be assessed with democratic criteria, but they raise different questions. Finally, for democratic evaluation it matters where polarization occurs and thus, we must differentiate between different sites of polarization: civil society, election campaigns, and legislatures. I recommend a systemic approach to assessing the democratic implication of polarization, which analyzes both the effects of polarization at different sites and on democracy as a composite whole.","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140694957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-16DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000422
Mikhail A. Alexseev, S. Dembitskyi
We examine why public support for democracy in Ukraine increased after Russia’s 2014 intervention and surged after Russia’s 2022 invasion—despite concerns that the wartime quest for security would diminish support for political freedoms. We statistically analyze original data generated as part of annual opinion surveys by the Institute of Sociology at Ukraine’s National Academy of Sciences in 2017 (N = 2,199), 2018 (N = 1,800), and a 2021–22 panel survey with the same respondents (N = 475) interviewed before and after Russia’s invasion. Our findings indicate that wartime support for democracy is in significant respects geosocietal—arising from the mobilization of civic national identity conditioned by salient geopolitical threats. Civic pride, attribution of threat to an external authoritarian aggressor, and war onset were the strongest and most robust predictors of multiple democracy support indicators, overriding personal loss and stress. The findings call for more attention to the interaction of geopolitical and social contexts shaping political attitudes, with implications for democratic futures globally.
{"title":"Geosocietal Support for Democracy: Survey Evidence from Ukraine","authors":"Mikhail A. Alexseev, S. Dembitskyi","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000422","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000422","url":null,"abstract":"We examine why public support for democracy in Ukraine increased after Russia’s 2014 intervention and surged after Russia’s 2022 invasion—despite concerns that the wartime quest for security would diminish support for political freedoms. We statistically analyze original data generated as part of annual opinion surveys by the Institute of Sociology at Ukraine’s National Academy of Sciences in 2017 (N = 2,199), 2018 (N = 1,800), and a 2021–22 panel survey with the same respondents (N = 475) interviewed before and after Russia’s invasion. Our findings indicate that wartime support for democracy is in significant respects geosocietal—arising from the mobilization of civic national identity conditioned by salient geopolitical threats. Civic pride, attribution of threat to an external authoritarian aggressor, and war onset were the strongest and most robust predictors of multiple democracy support indicators, overriding personal loss and stress. The findings call for more attention to the interaction of geopolitical and social contexts shaping political attitudes, with implications for democratic futures globally.","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140694630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-11DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000367
Belén González
{"title":"The Death and Life of State Repression: Understanding Onset, Escalation, Termination and Recurrence. By Christian Davenport and Benjamin J. Appel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022. 204p. $110.00 cloth, $32.99 paper.","authors":"Belén González","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000367","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140715963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-11DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000379
Azul A. Aguiar-Aguilar
{"title":"Prosecutors, Voters and the Criminalization of Corruption in Latin America: The Case of Lava Jato. By Ezequiel Gonzalez-Ocantos, Paula Muñoz Chirinos, Nara Pavão, and Viviana Baraybar Hidalgo. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023. 324p. $125.00 cloth.","authors":"Azul A. Aguiar-Aguilar","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000379","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000379","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140715043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-11DOI: 10.1017/s1537592724000471
Daniel Sledge
{"title":"Constitutional Contagion: COVID, the Courts, and Public Health. By Wendy E. Parmet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023. 200p. $75.00 cloth, $24.99 paper.","authors":"Daniel Sledge","doi":"10.1017/s1537592724000471","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592724000471","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48097,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140716152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：