The idea of America as politically polarized--that there is an unbridgeable divide between right and left, red and blue states--has become a cliche. What commentators miss, however, is that increasing polarization in recent decades has been closely accompanied by fundamental social and economic changes--most notably, a parallel rise in income inequality. In Polarized America, Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole, and Howard Rosenthal examine the relationships of polarization, wealth disparity, immigration, and other forces, characterizing it as a dance of give and take and back and forth causality.Using NOMINATE (a quantitative procedure that, like interest group ratings, scores politicians on the basis of their roll call voting records) to measure polarization in Congress and public opinion, census data and Federal Election Commission finance records to measure polarization among the public, the authors find that polarization and income inequality fell in tandem from 1913 to 1957 and rose together dramatically from 1977 on; they trace a parallel rise in immigration beginning in the 1970s. They show that Republicans have moved right, away from redistributive policies that would reduce income inequality. Immigration, meanwhile, has facilitated the move to the right: non-citizens, a larger share of the population and disproportionately poor, cannot vote; thus there is less political pressure from the bottom for redistribution than there is from the top against it. In "the choreography of American politics" inequality feeds directly into political polarization, and polarization in turn creates policies that further increase inequality.
具體描述
讀後感
Polarization is a buzz word in today's American political discourse. It is, however, not a well-defined term. Hierarchically, there are politicians polarization, political activists polarization and general electoral polarization. Within politicians polari...
評分Polarization is a buzz word in today's American political discourse. It is, however, not a well-defined term. Hierarchically, there are politicians polarization, political activists polarization and general electoral polarization. Within politicians polari...
評分Polarization is a buzz word in today's American political discourse. It is, however, not a well-defined term. Hierarchically, there are politicians polarization, political activists polarization and general electoral polarization. Within politicians polari...
評分Polarization is a buzz word in today's American political discourse. It is, however, not a well-defined term. Hierarchically, there are politicians polarization, political activists polarization and general electoral polarization. Within politicians polari...
評分Polarization is a buzz word in today's American political discourse. It is, however, not a well-defined term. Hierarchically, there are politicians polarization, political activists polarization and general electoral polarization. Within politicians polari...
用戶評價
讀瞭部分/第二章，政黨極化的兩個維度，ideology和rights，承認瞭選民的極化是choice but not an echo，否定瞭諸如southern realignment，congress reform和redistricting之類的解釋，作者認為是median income導緻瞭更保守的政黨政治和政策/第五章主要說的是soft money的作用，主要是來自極端的個人donator的捐款/第六章講公共政策和極化的關係，討論瞭最低工資財産稅醫療保險（醫保相對最穩定，因為一方麵不確定，另一方麵受median income的支持）同時國會和總統黨派不一緻時極化影響最顯著，通過降低政策靈活性、權力轉移到司法和行政（國會僵化）導緻瞭極化影響瞭公共政策（提到瞭pivot theory）
评分讀瞭部分/第二章，政黨極化的兩個維度，ideology和rights，承認瞭選民的極化是choice but not an echo，否定瞭諸如southern realignment，congress reform和redistricting之類的解釋，作者認為是median income導緻瞭更保守的政黨政治和政策/第五章主要說的是soft money的作用，主要是來自極端的個人donator的捐款/第六章講公共政策和極化的關係，討論瞭最低工資財産稅醫療保險（醫保相對最穩定，因為一方麵不確定，另一方麵受median income的支持）同時國會和總統黨派不一緻時極化影響最顯著，通過降低政策靈活性、權力轉移到司法和行政（國會僵化）導緻瞭極化影響瞭公共政策（提到瞭pivot theory）
评分讀瞭部分/第二章，政黨極化的兩個維度，ideology和rights，承認瞭選民的極化是choice but not an echo，否定瞭諸如southern realignment，congress reform和redistricting之類的解釋，作者認為是median income導緻瞭更保守的政黨政治和政策/第五章主要說的是soft money的作用，主要是來自極端的個人donator的捐款/第六章講公共政策和極化的關係，討論瞭最低工資財産稅醫療保險（醫保相對最穩定，因為一方麵不確定，另一方麵受median income的支持）同時國會和總統黨派不一緻時極化影響最顯著，通過降低政策靈活性、權力轉移到司法和行政（國會僵化）導緻瞭極化影響瞭公共政策（提到瞭pivot theory）
评分讀瞭部分/第二章，政黨極化的兩個維度，ideology和rights，承認瞭選民的極化是choice but not an echo，否定瞭諸如southern realignment，congress reform和redistricting之類的解釋，作者認為是median income導緻瞭更保守的政黨政治和政策/第五章主要說的是soft money的作用，主要是來自極端的個人donator的捐款/第六章講公共政策和極化的關係，討論瞭最低工資財産稅醫療保險（醫保相對最穩定，因為一方麵不確定，另一方麵受median income的支持）同時國會和總統黨派不一緻時極化影響最顯著，通過降低政策靈活性、權力轉移到司法和行政（國會僵化）導緻瞭極化影響瞭公共政策（提到瞭pivot theory）
评分讀瞭部分/第二章，政黨極化的兩個維度，ideology和rights，承認瞭選民的極化是choice but not an echo，否定瞭諸如southern realignment，congress reform和redistricting之類的解釋，作者認為是median income導緻瞭更保守的政黨政治和政策/第五章主要說的是soft money的作用，主要是來自極端的個人donator的捐款/第六章講公共政策和極化的關係，討論瞭最低工資財産稅醫療保險（醫保相對最穩定，因為一方麵不確定，另一方麵受median income的支持）同時國會和總統黨派不一緻時極化影響最顯著，通過降低政策靈活性、權力轉移到司法和行政（國會僵化）導緻瞭極化影響瞭公共政策（提到瞭pivot theory）
相關圖書
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息，本站不存儲任何數據與內容，任何內容與數據均與本站無關，如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美書屋 版权所有