Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
short note on writing skills
short note on writing skills
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: short note on writing skills
A Not So 50:50 Nation
Culture Wars? The Myth of a Polarized America: Book Review
The book Culture Wars? The Myth of a Polarized America by Morris P. Fiorina, Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy C. Pope is a persuasive text regarding America and its division on political topics.
In chapter one, Fiorina begins with a powerful quote from Pat Buchanan’s 1992 speech at the Republican National Convention, “There is a religious war…a cultural war as critical to the…nation…as the cold war…for this war is for the soul of America” (Fiorina et al. 1). Using several other quotes, he illustrates the belief that the nation is torn between personal morals and extreme conservative notions. He then states his belief that these sentiments are complete nonsense,
…show more content…
Furthermore, he introduces the idea that popular polarization is different from partisan polarization and that sorting has occurred within the parties. Meaning that “those who affiliate with a party… are more likely to affiliate with the ideologically ‘correct’ party than they were [before]” (Fiorina et al. 61). To illustrate the concept of polarization he uses a figure with marble filled urns. These urns depict red blue and gray marbles with r for republican d for democrat and i for independent. When polarization, all gray independent marbles disappear becoming either red or blue. In the example of sorting the first urn has blue d and r marbles, gray i marbles and red d and r marbles. When sorting occurs, r marbles are all red and the d marbles are all blue and the gray i marbles remain in the middle. The proportions remain essentially the same, however appearing more polarized. This is what the author believes has occurred in America, especially in the southern states and now individuals disregard where they live and choose based on who they are. He continues with the idea that Americans have both traditional and modern values. Polarization can be subjective, however American polarization around religious and moral issues is
Dye, Thomas R. , L. Tucker Gibson Jr., and Clay Robinson. Politics In America. Brief Texas Edition ed. New Jersey: Pearson, 2005.
Increasingly over the past two decades and in part thanks to the publication of James Davison Hunter’s book, Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America, the idea of a culture war in American politics has been gaining attention. While the tension between conservatives and liberals is palpable, it’s intensity has proven hard to measure. However, it doesn’t seem that many Americans are polarized on the topic of polarization as most would agree that the culture war is real (Fiorina, 2005). This thinking is what prompted Morris Fiorina to write the book Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. In it, Fiorina outlines an argument against the idea of a culture war by looking at party affiliation by states, how public opinion on hot button issues changed over time and various explanations for why Americans are so hung up on the topic of polarization. While Fiorina makes a good argument, the evidence supporting the culture war is too powerful to explain away.
Both works provide valuable insight into the political atmosphere of American society, but vary greatly in their intended message, usage of persuasive method, projected audience, and choice of tone. One can see resemblance, however, in the fact that the authors of both articles strive to spark a reaction in their readers and encourage change. In that regard, while Hedges’
Americans have embraced debate since before we were a country. The idea that we would provide reasoned support for any position that we took is what made us different from the English king. Our love of debate came from the old country, and embedded itself in our culture as a defining value. Thus, it should not come as a surprise that the affinity for debate is still strong, and finds itself as a regular feature of the mainstream media. However, if Deborah Tannen of the New York Times is correct, our understanding of what it means to argue may be very different from what it once was; a “culture of critique” has developed within our media, and it relies on the exclusive opposition of two conflicting positions (Tannen). In her 1994 editorial, titled “The Triumph of the Yell”, Tannen claims that journalists, politicians and academics treat public discourse as an argument. Furthermore, she attempts to persuade her readers that this posturing of argument as a conflict leads to a battle, not a debate, and that we would be able to communicate the truth if this culture were not interfering. This paper will discuss the rhetorical strategies that Tannen utilizes, outline the support given in her editorial, and why her argument is less convincing than it should be.
Dye, Thomas R., L. Tucker Gibson, Jr., and Clay Robison. Politics in America. Ninth ed. Vol. 2. New York, NY: Longman, 2011. 337. Print.
But, it also speaks to the wider systematic polarization within the American political system. Political polarization in the United States is a result of cultural and geographical polarization. South V. North, Republican V. Democrat and is firmly rooted in regional history. The cowboy persona which some of these Presidents and politicians choose to adopt, is inherently linked to the physical geographical place from which they hail and the role that place has played in the unfolding of American history. It shapes the character of, (as of yet at least) “the man”, his administration and ultimately the policy of the country for at least four years. The image and persona adopted by these men is nurtured by the regional culture and history of the place that they reside and represent. It can be seen in every president from Kennedy to Reagan and Bush to Obama.
Ken Kollman, The American Political System, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2012), 25, 322-323, 330, 449.
In the text, “The American Cultural Configuration” the authors express the desire of anthropologists to study their own culture despite the difficulty that one faces attempting to subjectively analyze their own society. Holmes and Holmes (2002), use the adage “not being able to see the forest through the trees” (p. 5) to refer to how hard it is for someone to study something they have largely taken for granted. The Holmes' article focuses predominately on paradoxes within our own culture, many of which we don't notice. In a paradox, two contradicting statements can appear to be true at the same time. This essay looks at two paradoxes commonly found in everyday life: the individual versus the family and religion.
Elazar, Daniel. "Explaining Policy Differences Using Political Culture." Reading. West Texas A&M University. Political Culture Handout. Dr. Dave Rausch, Teel Bivins Professor of Political Science. Web. 23 Mar. 2011. < http://www.wtamu.edu/~jrausch/polcul.html.>
The idea of political culture is found within the state’s history. The history of the state is impacted by the people settled in the region, religious backgrounds, and geography. The history of the state influences the attitudes and beliefs that people hold regarding their political system. Daniel Elazar theorized a connection between the states’ history and attitude towards government by explaining differences in government between states. Every state is different with some common ground. Elazar’s theory divides states into three types: moralistic, traditionalistic and individualistic. The state’s constitution defines the powers of government with political culture bias. Because of the state constitution, the political culture influences the power and limitations of governors, legislative, and judiciaries.
One would expect that social equality would just be the norm in society today. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Three similar stories of how inequality and the hard reality of how America’s society and workforce is ran shows a bigger picture of the problems American’s have trying to make an honest living in today’s world. When someone thinks about the American dream, is this the way they pictured it? Is this what was envisioned for American’s when thinking about what the future held? The three authors in these articles don’t believe so, and they are pretty sure American’s didn’t either. Bob Herbert in his article “Hiding from Reality” probably makes the most honest and correct statement, “We’re in denial about the extent of the rot in the system, and the effort that would be required to turn things around” (564).
1) What is political culture? What is the makeup of the political culture in the United States? Give two examples of how the political culture of the United States helps to unite Americans, even in disagreement.
Marc Howard Ross’s chapter on importance of culture in comparative politics in the Comparative Politics text is a comprehensive and important example of scholarship on culture in comparative politics. The chapter provides an overarching argument for how culture play a crucial role in explanation of politics. It focus on three important elements. Frist, How people uses culture to define meaning. Second, culture is the foundation of social and political identity which affects individual and collective behavior. Third, to a larger degree discusses methodological approaches in cultural studies as well as reports on the advances made in cultural analysis of politics by historically reviewing the cultural studies of politics.
Political culture can be defined as a list of ideas which people share and discuss. The topics that are mostly discuss are who should govern, at what degree, and how. The question of what is right and what is wrong is key component as it builds the foundation of political culture. The makeup of political culture in the United States rests on the belief the people should have the basic rights of life, liberty, and property. Political culture or opinion is what shaped this country the way it is today by changing the government to be fair and to govern with popular sovereignty. Three examples of how political culture helps to unite Americans are amendments, voting, and political parties.
Political culture is the zeitgeist of a population in regards to how their government should function, and what its purpose is. It is rather difficult for me to try to explain what it means to be American as it is quite ambiguous. While we as citizens enjoy many privileges that so many around the globe are bereft of, it is hard not to focus on the shortcomings of our nation, once you become aware of them. Growing up I always associated being an American citizens with the American dream. I believed firmly in the tenets of this notion; that through hard work and dedication anyone could achieve self-actualization. While this is certainly still possible, in my opinion is has become egregiously difficult, especially for the younger demographic.