You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
This book brings together several of the author’s empirical studies that demonstrate the strength and utility of sociologist Robert Merton’s classic middle-range theory for understanding aspects of both Soviet and post-Soviet Russian politics. Some of those studies demonstrate that testing middle-range social science theory could take place even in the Soviet era when there were significant limitations of access to empirical data, and meaningful field research in the USSR was all but impossible. In the introductory chapter, the author explains the need for and advantages of studying Russian and Soviet politics from the perspective of middle-range social science theory. Then follow three ...
This book, first published in 2001, examines why so many Americans do not like, trust, approve of, or support their government.
Trust in government dropped to a near-record low during the 1992 election as Ross Perot’s startling campaign illustrated all too graphically. Stephen Craig shows the trajectory of this popular discontent over the years and predicts that the “confidence gap” is not likely to close until citizens adjust their perceptions and expectations of government—a shift that would represent a major change in our political culture. Blending survey data and interviews with both elites and nonelites, Craig gives us a nuanced view of how people assess their leaders, how leaders see themselves, and how opinions converge and diverge on the issues that matter most: the economy, the environment, and, above all, the quality of our democracy.
This book looks at the newly empowered citizens of Russia’s protodemocracy facing choices at the ballot box that just a few years ago, under dictatorial rule, they could not have dreamt of. Colton finds that despite their unfamiliarity with democracy, subjects-turned-citizens learn about their electoral options from peers and the mass media.
Most American citizens are quick to criticize federal bureaucracy for its size and inefficiency. They assume it has exceeded the intent of our nation's founders; yet men like James Madison and Alexander Hamilton knew that good public administrators were essential to good government. William Richardson here examines the origins, legitimacy, and limitations of public administration from the perspective of the Founders' thought. He shows that these men—especially the authors of The Federalist—advocated an energetic public administration as an essential component of government and even considered the emergence of a "natural aristocracy" of virtuous civil servants. The Founders would see the ...
None