像你的长辈一样投票:神圣罗马帝国议会中的从众效应

IF 0.5 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY German History Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI:10.1093/gerhis/ghac073
Oliver Volckart
{"title":"像你的长辈一样投票:神圣罗马帝国议会中的从众效应","authors":"Oliver Volckart","doi":"10.1093/gerhis/ghac073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Scholars agree that a core feature of the political style of the Holy Roman Empire was the focus on consensus, without which policy-making at the level of the Empire would have been impossible. This article demonstrates that the consensus on which decisions of the imperial estates was based tended to be superficial and was often in danger of breaking down. This vulnerability was a product of the diet’s open and sequential voting procedure, which allowed the bandwagon effect to distort outcomes. An analysis of the votes cast in the princes’ college at the diet of 1555 shows that low-status members of the college regularly imitated the decisions of high-status voters. Reforming the system would have required accepting that the members of the college were equals—an idea no one was prepared to countenance. Hence, superficial and transitory agreements remained a systematic feature of politics at the level of the Empire.","PeriodicalId":44471,"journal":{"name":"German History","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Voting like Your Betters: The Bandwagon Effect in the Diet of the Holy Roman Empire\",\"authors\":\"Oliver Volckart\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/gerhis/ghac073\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Scholars agree that a core feature of the political style of the Holy Roman Empire was the focus on consensus, without which policy-making at the level of the Empire would have been impossible. This article demonstrates that the consensus on which decisions of the imperial estates was based tended to be superficial and was often in danger of breaking down. This vulnerability was a product of the diet’s open and sequential voting procedure, which allowed the bandwagon effect to distort outcomes. An analysis of the votes cast in the princes’ college at the diet of 1555 shows that low-status members of the college regularly imitated the decisions of high-status voters. Reforming the system would have required accepting that the members of the college were equals—an idea no one was prepared to countenance. Hence, superficial and transitory agreements remained a systematic feature of politics at the level of the Empire.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"German History\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"German History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/gerhis/ghac073\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/gerhis/ghac073","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学者们一致认为,神圣罗马帝国政治风格的一个核心特征是注重共识,没有共识,帝国层面的政策制定就不可能实现。这篇文章表明,共识上的皇权的决定是基于往往是肤浅的,往往有崩溃的危险。这种脆弱性是国会公开和顺序投票程序的产物,这使得从众效应扭曲了结果。对1555年国王学院议会投票的分析表明,学院中地位低的成员经常模仿地位高的选民的决定。改革这一制度需要承认学院成员是平等的——这是一个没有人愿意接受的想法。因此,肤浅和暂时的协议仍然是帝国一级政治的系统特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Voting like Your Betters: The Bandwagon Effect in the Diet of the Holy Roman Empire
Abstract Scholars agree that a core feature of the political style of the Holy Roman Empire was the focus on consensus, without which policy-making at the level of the Empire would have been impossible. This article demonstrates that the consensus on which decisions of the imperial estates was based tended to be superficial and was often in danger of breaking down. This vulnerability was a product of the diet’s open and sequential voting procedure, which allowed the bandwagon effect to distort outcomes. An analysis of the votes cast in the princes’ college at the diet of 1555 shows that low-status members of the college regularly imitated the decisions of high-status voters. Reforming the system would have required accepting that the members of the college were equals—an idea no one was prepared to countenance. Hence, superficial and transitory agreements remained a systematic feature of politics at the level of the Empire.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
German History
German History Multiple-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
85
期刊介绍: German History is the journal of the German History Society and was first published in 1984. The journal offers refereed research articles, dissertation abstracts, news of interest to German historians, conference reports and a substantial book review section in four issues a year. German History’s broad ranging subject areas and high level of standards make it the top journal in its field and an essential addition to any German historian"s library.
期刊最新文献
‘Real National Work’: The Politics of Nazi Race Science in Upper Silesia, 1934–1942 Everyday Denazification in Postwar Germany: The Fragebogen and Political Screening during the Allied Occupation Beyond the Wall: East Germany, 1949–1990 Bodies in Pain: Early Modern Suicide by Proxy End Game: The 1989 Revolution in East Germany
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1