Correlates Of Political Tolerance And Intolerance In The United States

Seminar paper from the year 2012 in the subject Sociology - Political Sociology, Majorities, Minorities, grade: 1,0, Eastern Illinois University, language: English, abstract: Scholars have suggested a number of different causes of political tolerance and intolerance. Using data from the 2008 American National Election Studies (ANES), we test seven of the causes frequently mentioned in the literature (age, gender, education, religion, ideology, social capital and perceived threat) while controlling for class and ethnicity. We find that religion, ethnicity and especially ideology explain variation in attitudes toward fringe groups quite well, while class and especially social capital appear to be rather poor predictors of an individual ́s level of tolerance. We also find that of our nine independent variables, only gender affected tolerance levels precisely as predicted. For all other independent variables, the relationship with political tolerance is not entirely in line with the predictions of previous research; in some cases, it is even the complete opposite. Thus, our results partially challenge the findings of previous studies and demonstrate the need for further research on political tolerance.

This path-breaking book reconceptualizes our understanding of political tolerance as well as of its foundations. Previous studies, the authors contend, overemphasized the role of education in explaining the presence of tolerance, while giving insufficient weight to personality and ideological factors. With an innovative methodology for measuring levels of tolerance more accurately, the authors are able to explain why particular groups are targeted and why tolerance is an inherently political concept. Far from abating, the degree of intolerance in America today is probably as great as it ever was; it is the targets of intolerance that have changed.

Challenging a widespread belief that religious people are politically intolerant, Marie Ann Eisenstein offers compelling evidence to the contrary. In this surprising and significant book, she thoroughly re-examines previous studies and presents new research to support her argument that there is, in fact, a positive correlation between religious belief and practice and political tolerance in the United States. Eisenstein utilizes sophisticated new analytical tools to re-evaluate earlier data and offers persuasive new statistical evidence to support her claim that religiousness and political tolerance do, indeed, mix--and that religiosity is not the threat to liberal democracy that it is often made out to be.

This work holds that political tolerance and behaviour are the product of social and cultural interactions between individuals and culture rather than of inner psychological traits. It applies the sociological theories of John Dewey, Karl Mannheim and George H. Mead.

Over the past three decades, the study of religion and politics has gone from being ignored by the scholarly 7ommunity to being a major focus of research. Yet, because this important research is not easily accessible to nonspecialists, much of the analysis of religion's role in the political arena that we read in the media is greatly oversimplified. This Handbook seeks to bridge that gap by examining the considerable research that has been conducted to this point andassessing what has been learned, what remains unsettled due to conflicting research findings, and what important questions remain largely unaddressed by current research endeavors. The Handbook is unique to the field of religion and American politics and should be of wide interest to scholars, students, journalists, and others interested in the American political scene.

With Malice toward Some: How People Make Civil Liberties Judgments addresses an issue integral to democratic societies: how people faced with a complex variety of considerations decide whether or not to tolerate extremist groups. Relying on several survey-experiments, Marcus, Sullivan, Theiss-Morse, and Wood identify and compare the impact on decision making of contemporary information, long-standing predispositions, and enduring values and beliefs. Citizens react most strongly to information about a group's violations of behavioral norms and information about the implications for democracy of the group's actions. The authors conclude that democratic citizens should have a strong baseline of tolerance yet be attentive to and thoughtful about current information.

What makes people agree to the extension of political rights to those they clearly dislike? This book moves beyond the extensive research on this question in western contexts to focus on the global south, offering unique empirical studies of political tolerance in plural societies where poverty is prevalent and democratic institutions can often be fragile. Based on extensive data gathered in India, Pakistan and Uganda, this volume offers an account of the factors that shape the foundations of a society and its capacity to be democratic, but where the need for the protection of human rights is great and where the state is either weak or even constitutes a counter-force against the rights of individuals and groups. Combining large scale survey data with in-depth interviews in each national setting, the author exemplifies the great variation of factors which are related to political tolerance, shedding light on the fundamental patterns existing in the organisation of state-society relations and the ways in which they produce certain results owing to the manner in which the forces of modernisation operate. A broad and empirically informed study of what shapes the foundations of a democratic society in modernising nations, Political Tolerance in the Global South will appeal to scholars of sociology and political science with interests in democracy, human rights, diversity and tolerance.