Pluralism In Political Analysis

The theory of democratic pluralism has long provided the dominant ideal and description of politics in industrial societies with competing party systems. The purpose of this classic collection, including some of the leading theorists of the late 1960s, is to subject this theory to systematic scrutiny. The authors examine the work of such pluralists as Robert Dahl, David Truman, Adolf Berle, Arthur Bentley, Joseph Schumpeter, and Walter Lippmann, as well as of such critics of pluralist theory as C. Wright Mills, Herbert Marcuse, Henry Kariel, and Grant McConnell.Voicing the respective points of view of science, economics, philosophy, and psychology, the authors converge in their agreement that the conventional, pluralist interpretation of contemporary politics requires significant revision. The views of these diverse critics coalesce into the outline of what they see as a more enlightened political ideal and a more relevant descriptive theory. This collective portrait offers a provocatively new interpretative framework for the understanding of the politics of contemporary industrial society.Connolly includes a sophisticated discussion of such concepts as power, decision-making, politics, and interest groups and devotes considerable attention to the need to promote positive change, particularly where the pluralist system shows bias against certain segments of society as well as against some dimensions of social life affecting everyone's existence in the society. Intended for use in Comparative Government, Contemporary Political Theory, Political Parties and Pressure Groups, and advanced courses in American Government, this volume remains a challenging resource for those dealing with the nature and possible change of the organization of contemporary democratic society.

The theory of democratic pluralism has long provided the dominant ideal and description of politics in industrial societies with competing party systems. The purpose of this classic collection, including some of the leading theorists of the late 1960s, is to subject this theory to systematic scrutiny. The authors examine the work of such pluralists as Robert Dahl, David Truman, Adolf Berle, Arthur Bentley, Joseph Schumpeter, and Walter Lippmann, as well as of such critics of pluralist theory as C. Wright Mills, Herbert Marcuse, Henry Kariel, and Grant McConnell. Voicing the respective points of view of science, economics, philosophy, and psychology, the authors converge in their agreement that the conventional, pluralist interpretation of contemporary politics requires significant revision. The views of these diverse critics coalesce into the outline of what they see as a more enlightened political ideal and a more relevant descriptive theory. This collective portrait offers a provocatively new interpretative framework for the understanding of the politics of contemporary industrial society. Connolly includes a sophisticated discussion of such concepts as power, decision-making, politics, and interest groups and devotes considerable attention to the need to promote positive change, particularly where the pluralist system shows bias against certain segments of society as well as against some dimensions of social life affecting everyone's existence in the society. Intended for use in Comparative Government, Contemporary Political Theory, Political Parties and Pressure Groups, and advanced courses in American Government, this volume remains a challenging resource for those dealing with the nature and possible change of the organization of contemporary democratic society.

The book focuses on the study of democratic processes. Special emphasis is put (1) on the existence of a diversity of (e. g. socio-economic, ethno-cultural,.) interests and the transformation of this diversity into public policies, (2) on the participatory features of democracy and on barriers to individual and group participation due to disparities in economic and political resources.

Pluralism today is not much a particular school of thought or coherent body of theory. McLennan argues that pluralism is an indispensable reference point across a spectrum of social scientific debates.

Territorial pluralism is a form of political autonomy designed to accommodate national, ethnic, or linguistic differences within a state. It has the potential to provide for the peaceful, democratic, and just management of difference. But given traditional concerns about state sovereignty, nation-building, and unity, how realistic is it to expect that a state’s authorities will agree to recognize and empower distinct substate communities? Territorial Pluralism answers this question by examining a wide variety of cases, including developing and industrialized states and democratic and authoritarian regimes. Drawing on examples of both success and failure, contributors analyze specific cases to understand the kinds of institutions that emerge in response to demands for territorial pluralism, as well as their political effects. With identity conflicts continuing to have a major impact on politics around the globe, they argue that territorial pluralism remains a legitimate and effective means for managing difference in multinational states.

Pluralism at Yale: The Culture of Political Science in America explores the relationship between personal experience and academic theories of American politics. Through a detailed examination of the Yale University Department of Political Science between 1955 and 1970, including interviews with many of the political scientists involved, this book traces the way "pluralism," a predominately optimistic theory of American democracy which the Yale department helped to develop in those years, helped to support the American political regime. Merelman also analyzes the impact of social and political events on the decline of Yale pluralism and describes pluralism's continued political relevance today. Included are discussions of McCarthyism, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Vietnam War.

A central question in political science is who governs and how. Typically political scientists attempt to answer this question by relying upon either empirical analysis, which explains existing political practices, or normative analysis, which prescribes ideal political practices. Political scientist Paul Schumaker rejects this distinction between empirical and normative theory. Instead, he weds the two approaches to create the new analytical mode he calls critical pluralism. With it he can measure variances in government from pluralist/democratic ideals and still provide theoretical explanations of why the variances occurred. Schumaker uses critical pluralism to describe, explain, and evaluate variations in three key measures of democratic performance: responsible representation, complex equality, and principle-policy congruence. To test his framework and methodology he analyzes 29 community issues that arose in Lawrence, Kansas, between 1977 and 1987. The results of his study—one of the most comprehensive databases ever in the study of community politics—will be of interest to those who study community power. The conceptual framework itself and methodology used in assessing democratic performance will have a lasting impact on the way community government is studied.

The political discontent or malaise that typifies most modern democracies is mainly caused by the widely shared feeling that the political freedom of citizens to influence the development of their society and, related to this, their personal life, has become rather limited. We can only address this discontent when we rehabilitate politics, the deliberate, joint effort to give direction to society and to make the best of ourselves. In Pluralism, Democracy and Political Knowledge, Hans Blokland examines this challenge via a critical appraisal of the pluralist conception of politics and democracy. This conception was formulated by, above all, Robert A. Dahl, one of the most important political scholars and democratic theorists of the last half century. Taking his work as the point of reference, this book not only provides an illuminating history of political science, told via Dahl and his critics, it also offers a revealing analysis as to what progress we have made in our thinking on pluralism and democracy, and what progress we could make, given the epistemological constraints of the social sciences. Above and beyond this, the development and the problems of pluralism and democracy are explored in the context of the process of modernization. The author specifically discusses the extent to which individualization, differentiation and rationalization contribute to the current political malaise in those countries which adhere to a pluralist political system.