Govt020 Final Flashcards
1
Q
What is the Federalist vision of representation?
A
- Trustee Model (e.g., Burke’s letter to the electors of Bristol in Coby)
- a talented, virtuous, wise, experienced representative who is (a) deeply rooted in and sympathetic to his district but also (b) able to get a view from above its petty squabbles and passing passions and parochialism to see its interests in the big and long-term scheme of things
- a representative who can learn from and contribute to deliberation on the public interest of all the districts;
- therefore, big and heterogenous districts–and republics–are best
2
Q
What is the Anti Federalist vision of representation?
A
- Agent model (e.g., Brutus 1 and Federal Farmer 7)
- a representative should resemble the people and kept circulating among them to retain his similarity to and sympathy with their view of the world and their interests
- constituents must keep an eye on reps to ensure strict accountability
- a rep must have deep bonds of trust with his district members
- districts– and republics–must therefore be small and homogenous to be responsibly represented - Antifederalists wanted strong state government, weak national government, small electoral districts, term limits, short terms; thought closer was safer; worried about the “common man”
3
Q
What is deliberation; and what Constitutional features were designed to enhance it?
A
- Deliberation is where ideas are debated, thought through; formed executive branch so that legislative could focus and deliberate on issues at hand
- Separation of powers: hard to pass new laws so more parties to persuade to talk, more conversation
- Elections: campaigns of convincing voters and conversation about politics / common good
- Defusing majority factions so no one faction dominates deliberation via big republic, “Extend the Sphere”
- Senate has long terms, farsightedness, insulates them from immediate popular demand
- 2 chamber congress so have to have whole conversation twice
- Expand talent pool to include more deliberations for leadership
- Presidential veto + has to explain to Congress why
- Small chambers in congress which allows for face-to-face conversations
4
Q
What is the liberal Democratic California vision of the good?
A
- Overall, California is a much more progressive state compared to other states in the US
- Have larger government (robust, public sphere) ; proactive role in addressing social / economic issues
- Focused on (1) deeply green agenda / climate change, (2) universal health care, (3) embracing undocumented immigrants, and (4) LGBT rights (overall helping vulnerable communities / populations)
- California vision of good includes high taxes (to be able to run expensive government and redistribution of wealth), bigger full time legislative branch, heavy regulation, gun control / regulations, environmentalism, pro-choice, less religious, sanctuary states for illegal immigrants, and having social safety nets
5
Q
What is the conservative Republican Texan vision of the good?
A
- Small government → enhance freedom & economy
- Emphasize individual freedom & responsibilities
Freedom of speech and gun rights
Less healthcare funding and individual benefits - Socially conservative
Pro life
Less focus on LGBTQ (Bathroom Bills)
Strict laws on immigration - Business friendly
Low tax: no income tax for small businesses
Lack of environmental protection: all energy mindset
Low minimum wage
Prioritize energy/economy over the environment
Limits of unions
6
Q
What is a faction according to Madison? What causes them and why are they such a problem to a system based on popular sovereignty? How did Madison propose to solve it in Federalist #10?
A
- A faction is a “group of citizens united against the common good or the rights of other citizens”
- Factions come in two sizes: minority and majority – either can harm others or the common good
- Humans are triggered to form factions over endless causes: religious, political, frivolous, and especially economic
- Factions are natural to human society and therefore can only be destroyed by repressive and authoritarian means, therefore, they flourish especially under conditions of freedom
- Republican government must help adjudicate between the conflicting demands of, and keep the peace among, factions
- This will be facilitated by “Extend[ing] the sphere”:
A big district and republic will help government manage factions without resorting to liberty-destroying oppression in part by making it more difficult for majority factions to form, by increasing the number of factions so there is natural and healthy competition between them, and by forcing them to make their claims in terms that appeal to a larger public good
A big district and republic will enable the elevation to leadership of representatives who are less likely to be beholden or totally persuaded by any particularistic or parochial faction’s views - Federalist #10 portrays factions as a problem to be solved. TODAY, we understand that in democratic republics, private citizen organizations can–and should!–form as the main way that citizens can make themselves visible to their representatives and participate in government. (Remember: Tocqueville and Putnam worried that citizens might not form groups!) Citizens organize in political parties and in interest groups. An interest group indicates any formal association of individuals or organizations that attempt to influence government decision-making and/or the making of public policy. Often, this influence is exercised by employing a professional or volunteer lobbyist or a lobbying firm
7
Q
What are the major drivers of polarization? Why are we polarized? (Miller, Klein, Rauch, Ziblatt & Levitsky)
A
- polarization is act of dividing something, especially something that contains different people or opinions
- Rauch
Social media (emotional, disinformation, erodes social trust)
Cancel culture
Trump disinformation campaigns - Klein
Identity politics, cannot compromise
Feedback loops of polarization: politicians + political actors behave in more polarized way to attract polarized public, their “base voters” which further polarizes public and this becomes loop
Party system, “zero sum game”: bipartisanship is irrational, narrow majority in Congress; small donors tend to be on the extremes - Ziblatt & Levitsky
Party nomination shifts: pre-1968 parties used to be in control where able to weed out demagogues but not as democratic ; new system is much more democratic but most of the left Democrats and right Republicans show up in the primaries so it has a polarizing effect - Miller
Political trifectas → polarization of states
MORE INFORMATION BELOW
Klein focused on identity politics and the weakness of new parties (like due to the new system for picking candidates)
Identity policies is expressing who you are; Klein argues it makes it more polarized and wants to break out of idea that only some people have identities, we all do
Key idea is ‘negative partisanship’: partisan behavior driven not by positive feelings toward the party you support but negative feelings toward the party you oppose. “We became more consistent in the party we vote for not because we came to like our party more indeed, we’ve come to like the parties we vote for less but because we came to dislike the opposing party more,” (Klein, 10).
With party nominations selected by base voters, “all of this eroded the power of party elites and amplified the power of primary voters, who are more polarized group than general election voters,” (Klein, 181).
Levisky and Ziblatt focused on the new system for picking candidates (democracy vs. gatekeeping)
Pre-1972 party nomination system advantage was able to weed out demagogues, ensure that people are educated but also popular but the disadvantage was it was not truly democratic as it was group of elites, not citizens or state elected officials
With new system, candidates have to get support from citizens for the primaries; many resort to polarizing comments to gain support from their “base”
Rauch focused on how 3 things further polarization
(1) social media: disinformation spreads very easily with people valuing attention and instant gratification / dopamine boosts over education / knowledge
(2) Trump’s disinformation campaigns: lied in his speeches, got progressively worse as in office; created an epistemic succession, capitalizing on polarization thus worsening it
(3) cancel culture: goes for the extreme as it involves canceling a person for a single action, does not take into account person’s reputation or history; decreases diversity in conversation
Miller focused on California and Texas and their expanding spheres of influences and how each would sue the federal government when the opposing party was in the president’s office; there is also political polarization in each of the states
8
Q
What is institutional forbearance and give 2 examples from different branches. Say why it matters.
A
- Institutional forbearance is restraining yourself from using all your Constitutional power
is avoiding actions that, while respecting the letter of the law, obviously violate its spirit.
Underusing power to keep the competition / game - matters because without it, it leads to more escalated political combat, polarized
Leads to norm breaking followed by norm breaking followed by norm breaking. - Executive Office
Presidential term limits: FDR was upsetting norm so they passed amendment
Executive orders used to bypass Congress
Presidential pardons shouldn’t be overused, if pardoning all sorts of people - Legislative Branch
Congress shouldn’t overuse impeachment or use it lightly
Filibuster in the Senate
9
Q
Why does civil society matter to democracy in the United States and how has it changed over American history? (Can draw on Tocqueville, Putnam, Wilson)
A
- civil society is society considered as a community of citizens linked by common interests and collective activity ; the collective action of a state’s citizen based upon shared interests, purpose, and values
made up of religious organizations, neighborhood organizations, news media, etc. - Self government happens ; being active citizens
- With more civil society and trust there is an increased in health, happiness, safety, money
- Putnam: U shaped curve (starting at 1900s with peak in 1960 to ending in 2000) in Bowling alone; how social trust drove participatory democracy
- Tocqueville: “Amerilanism” in forming voluntary associations (churches, etc.) which tempered individualism
- Unchecked individual in participating systems causes tyranny
- “Taste for association” threats individualism
10
Q
Specify 2 challenges posed by–and 2 advantages of–diversity to the American political system. (Can draw on the anti feds/feds, Fed #10, James Wilson, Yascha Mounk, and Ezra Klein and Jonathan Rauch)
A
ADVANTAGES
- According to Federalist #10, solution to factions and tyranny of the majority is having more diversity
Means that less likely to have one majority faction oppressing the other since majority is harder to achieve
- Constitution of Knowledge requires diversity so that able to figure out truth
Democratic deliberation
Truer knowledge means better deliberation
- Politics are more moderated due to diverse coalitions collaborating
DISADVANTAGES
- Wilson: More diversity, less social trust in the short run; makes people less likely to support social nets for people
- Diversity has hurt the Republican party compared to the Democratic party; Democratic party have to market themselves to large group of people while Republicans only to one group, Republicans have become more ideologically charged so become more polarized
- Klein: diversity can lead to the formation of identity-based political coalitions, which may heighten conflicts along racial, ethnic, or cultural lines
11
Q
What social and cultural traditions/norms help a democratic republic thrive? (Can draw on Tocqueville, Putnam, Ziblatt and Levitsky, and Jonathan Rauch)
A
- Tocqueville & Putnam: civic associations, social/civic engagement
More social trust & social fabric
Speak to their government
Greater economic equality
Share interests
More business / personal connections: congregations - Ziblatt & Levisky: mutual toleration & institutional forbearance
Mutual toleration: idea that as long as our rivals play by constitutional rules, we accept that they have an equal right to exist, compete for power, and govern ; that political rivals are decent, patriotic, law-abiding citizens even if we disagree with their ideology
Institutional forbearance: restraining yourself from using all your Constitutional power; avoiding actions that, while respecting the letter of the law, obviously violate its spirit.
Underusing power to keep the competition / game
Avoid destructive escalating political combat gridlock - Rauch: reality based communities that filter and create knowledge (“the Constitution of Knowledge”
Journalism, academic institutions, science organizations, legal systems
Freedom of speech
Enhances deliberation
12
Q
What are 2 things (forces, people, institutions) that enhance the ability of Congress to deliberate in modern times? What are 2 constraints on Congress’s ability to deliberate? (draw on Congress readings)
A
DELIBERATION
- Wallach: filibuster requires supermajority so political minorities have say and forces big coalition to get anything passed + innovative compromises
- Committee, small spaces; intimate deliberation (little legislatures)
- Multiple drafters info from lobbyists who can provide useful information
- Senate does have big picture deliberation, House can see “seams of 435 districts”
NO DELIBERATION
- Klein: Polarization leaders to party loyalty and conflict - focus: defeat enemy not compromise public good; Filibuster used as sabotage tactic in 21st century
- Tellis & Druckman: Lack of proper staffing deprives lawmakers of information and ability to process faction’ claims (lobbyists can be overly loud)
13
Q
What is the Constitution of Knowledge? Describe 3 threats it faces today. (Rauch)
A
- The Constitution of Knowledge is an extended metaphor to the Constitution of the United states ; both are social compacts, both follow formal rules and informal norms, both take coercion off limits and require people to negotiate + deliberate, are resilient + fragile
- A social compact to create a free, open, non-coercive effort to discern reality that
Claims a monopoly on legitimate epistemic authority
Shapes institutions that seek to discern reality
Establishes norms that govern the pursuit of knowledge in the institutions
Relies heavily on informal norms critical to its flourishing (e.g., civility) - Way of thinking of how we perceive vision of reality to make public policy about everything ; comparing it to the Constitution in same way that system is compromised with institutions that seek the truth + values that bolster its pursuit
- Saying that “marketplace of ideas” is not a good metaphor; instead academy including journalists, etc. have norms and practices; they collect propositions and check them using values of accountability, civility; etc
THREATS
1) Social Media
Is a type of misinformation technology ; instead of passing on verified truth, passion on attention headlines that are attention grabbing that usually die in academy since they are silly or are weeded out but on social media is shocking, catches people attention and then is shared
Becomes disinformation technology and messes up the funnel as we prioritize eyeballs and attention over knowledge
2) Trump disinformation campaign
Trump would tell implausible lies, say opposite claims in the same conversation
Trump has successfully created an epistemic succession: wherein he has created a cultish alternate reality where only everything he and his allies say is true
Capitalizing on polarization, when feel morally outraged, good v evil can short-circuit critical thinking
Trump offering political truth for these people, that the system rigged against them (us)
Doesn’t think MAGA are dumb, but are victims of misinformation campaigns
lots of Russians think fighting Nazis in in Ukraine, are victim of disinformation tactics that trump has adopted in free speech country
to alienate people from constitution of knowledge
3) Cancel Culture
Does not search for truth or discourse, rather looks to stigmatize and de-platform
Has groupthink and does not look for a diversity of voices
We want to be civil so people are okay with being incorrect, cancel culture prevents this through fear of social punishment
