US Flashcards
the case + democratization
US important: global influence
next electoins: nov 5th 2024 (Harris leading the polls since august)
system copy pasted to Brazil and Nigeria (Brazil started with Westminster-Whitehall idea, but changed)
1783 independence from England
gradual democratization + overall high levels of democracy: bc no absolute monarchy or smth
recent years: decline democracy + after WW2 slow continuing democratization (unlike EU): civil rights not optimal yet (e.g. only in 60s attention to minority rights)
culture and nation
50 states (incl. Hawaii and Alaska since 1959)
splended isolation -> relatively free from external enemies
(some wars with Mexico over e.g. Texas)
demography =
- white majority = Italians, Irish used to be discriminated against = declining due to migration and lower birth rates
- African Americans (origins: slavery)
- Indians (in specific racial reserves)
- Muslim (relatively small but growing)
white majority feels under threat transnational cleavage -> feel left behind (e.g. bc affirmative action policies) -> exclusive nationalism and nativism
historical dev. colonies + revo
13 colonies east coast with many settlers: fertile land + pelgrims (with negative conception of the state, bc they left the strong state)
- !!!! situation as settler colony diff than e.g. Algeria and Nigeria: settlers wanted the independence (Algeria and Nigeria: indigenous wanted independence)
settlers got own insitutions over time + eventually didn’t want to be attached to the UK any more -> Boston Tea Party: No taxation without representation
1765-1783 revolution and independence
1781 = articles of confederation
federalists vs antifederalists
1787 = constitutional convention
1789 put into effect = oldest in the world
liberal democr. idea: making sure that every state has rights
1789-1791 = Bill of Rights
- incl. second amendment: protects right to keep/bear arms
(Bill of Rights)
1789-91
civil war
1861-65
North = industrialization
South = slavery, agriculture
-> regional cleavage along economic lines + slavery
after resolving internal cleavage -> more prominent world stage = tendency to go between isolationism and world policing
- entered into WW1 + came out well (Woodrow Wilson key figure LoN)
- isolationist tendency among elites (more and more after the Vietnam war)
+ gradual expansion federal state (e.g. 1913 national income tax)
civil rights movement
not many civil rights after wW2 in comparison with European countries
19506-60s = civil rights movement = spurred on by silent revolution
states were protected from federal -> could discriminate as they wished (which fed gov increasingly saw as an issue)
- 1954 Brown vs Board of Education: constitutional court declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional
1965 voting rights act (more polling stations etc.)
(Rosa park on “white bus” was not a spontaneous action as claimed)
American exceptionalism
notion that US is unique among nations
“first new nation” : frontier mentality
+ international mission to ‘lead the free world’
absence of old European class, religious or regime conflicts
principles of Americanism:
- freedom (indiv liberty, anti-gov)
- equality of opportunity (not result “pursuit of happiness”)
- individualism
- liberalism (checks on executive power)
- democracy (Lincoln: “of the people, by the people and for the people”)
- property rights (capitalism)
- constitutionalism (constitution as cornerstone of democracy)
American dream as ideological identity/discrimination
cleavages: religion
not that big: no history of absolutism
puritan pilgrims: emphasis on religous freedom (fled absolutist Europe)
no national church = no anticlericalism
religion and democracy go hand in hand
until the 60s: catholics vs protestatns
since 60s: new christian right + republican alignment
strong politicization of: abortion, euthanasia, LGBT+ rights, drugs
cleavages: class
not very important bc:
- suffrage before strong industrialization
- no unified working class
- american dream: equality of opportunity
BUT: very high and growing inequality
ethnicity/race cleavage
- nation of immigrants
- legacy of segregation and racism
- whites have more wealth, still feels marginalized (diff objective difference and subjective feelings)
!not all African Americans vote against Trump: there’s an individual difference between groups (some vote Republican bc they are afraid of authoritarianism)
on average: democrats are more progressive, gaining more votes from minority groups
WASP
= white, anglosaksen, protestant
-> presidential leaders were expected to be this
state structures
majoritarian + liberal elements
separation of powers
- (in)directly elected president
- directly elected bicameral legislature
- powerful judiciary and strong constitution
- powerful states
- importance of veto-powers
- direct democracy
wariness about a strong state
symmetric federalism, but not cooperative like in Germany
majoritarian element: lots of positions have to be decided by majority vote (-> voter fatigue + decreasing turnout)
US president
- (in) directly elected for 4y terms
- eligibility: 35y old + natural born citizen
- appoints/fires cabinet
- nominates judges, ambassadors, public officials (Senate has to approve the nominations)
- commander-in-chief of armed forces
- veto powers (but can be overruled)
- powers expanded over time
impeachment procedure (congress):
treason, bribery and other high crimes
can be initiated with simple majority in the House, Senate conducts the trial
- impeachment: simple majority in the house of representatives + 2/3 majority in the Senate
presidential candidates
chosen with primaries: registered members can vote for the presidential candidates
-> diff electoral systems per party
problem with primaries: create divisions in the party
(still, having primaries increases democratic legitimacy, leading to more votes)
presidential elections
indirect: voting for the Electoral College
all states (except Maine and Nebraska) = FPTP / winner-take-all
-> one party gets all the seats in the electoral college
focus on “swing states” (states where both parties have ~equal levels of support -> elections highly competitive)
Electoral College votes the president
- each state has electors equaling the nr of representatives and senators (+ 3 from DC) -> 538
- states and parties determine manner of selecting their electors
- states determine how electors are allocated
- winners must have majority (not plurality) of 270 votes
- possibiity of “faithless electors”
“faitless electors”: vote is per letter, in all states but Maine and Nebraska electors are asked to vote for the person that won the majority, sometimes there are sneaky electors that vote differently than they were supposed to do
2020: Trump said elections were stolen, Georgia had sent letters for Biden, Trump sent letters for himself and asked vice president Pence to disregard the original letters -> Pence didn’t do it and saved democracy
2016: Clinton won majority, Trump won more states
2020: Biden won majority and most states
Congress: the House of Representatives
- 435 members (6 non-voting, Washington DC)
- 2y terms
- introduces and passes legislation (mostly: budget, taxes and revenue)
!no deadline for decisions on the budget -> often gridlock
elections:
- SMD and plurality -> 2-party system (Duverger’s law)
- gerrymandering
- cohabitation: party majority in the house can be diff from the party of the president (esp in the elections 2y into the presidency)
Senate
each state has 2 members, irrespective of population size
reflects liberal democracy: protecting small states
- 6y terms
- 1/3 elected every 2y
- presided over by vice president (deciding vote)
*vice president also introduces and passes legislation - introduces and passes legislation
- approves presidential appointments
!every bill has to pass both senate and house -> can also cause gridlock: composition can be diff in both chambers
independent
mostly been associated with republican power since 2022
elements of direct democracy + low turnout
vote for specific positions, e.g. judges, school board members, mayors
election day = first Tuesday of november
(always get a billet, if its for school leadership or president)
turnout = llowest among western democracies:
- voter fatigue (vote so much)
- winner-take-all system
- registration laws
- anti-gov mentality
- active voter suppression and gerrymandering (most weird shapes constituencies to make sure that incumbents can keep their position)
judiciary
= Supreme Court
- powerful judiciary
- conservative members
- lifetime appointments
- 9 members, three (appointed by Trump) are controversial: Gorsuch, Kavenaugh, Barret
*Barret: controversial bc Obama couldn’t put new member in place just before elections, so why could Trump?
Federalism
origins: 13 colonies
now: 50 states + federal district + 5 overseas territories
states have significant powers (health, education, welfare)
- e.g. southern states banned some books, evolution theory etc.
competitive federalism = e.g. tax competition
- different levels of government (federal, state, and local) compete with one another to attract residents, businesses, and investments
produces lack of standardization
(states responsible for own revenue generation, in contrast to Germany, where federal gov collects and distributes)
political parties
parties/factions originally seen as something to be wary about, in the 80s the main 2 parties came up
- constitution makes no mention of parties
- since 1850s: democrats vs republicans
- traditionally: no strong ideological differences
- lacking internal coherence
- primarily campaign organizations
- no party membership, only ‘registration’
- open structure of parties (see e.g. Trump and Sanders that got really big really fast without that much initial support)
no strong ideologies -> more personal influences
political parties: republicans
founded 1854
elephant logo
famous presidents: Lincoln, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Bush, Trump
‘Grand Old Party’ (but the Democrats (1828) are older)
ideology = lose
(ideology used to be: large federal gov. + urban voters)
- conservative
- christian values
- small federal gov.
- rural, white voters
- free trade (sometimes), foreign affairs
since 2016 (Trump): ideological transformation/radicalization
- vote didn’t go to the more central candidate in the primaries as usual
Political parties: democrats
1828
donkey logo
origins: focus on the ‘common man’
since 1960s: more left-wing, progressive
ideology:
- equality of opportunity
- interventionist: bigger federal state
- liberalism (political and economic)
- progressive values
- urban and minority voters
- social rights and environmentalism
since 2016: leftists (Sanders/Warren) vs centrists (Clinton/Biden)
affective polarization
mix ideological and affective polarization
- ideological = partisan cleavage
- affective = emotional divisons us-them (divides that crosscut partisan lines)
unfavorable opinions towards the other group increasing since 1994
- reasons: media echochambers
*media are private -> fox (republican bias) diff media than CNN + they depict each other as the enemy
effects of polarization
- extreme polarization undermines democratic stability (see French 4th republic + Weimar Germany)
- decline of cross-cutting identities (sorting)
sorting = overlapping cleavages worse: Republican neighborhood, so i won’t move there - radicalization of voters and parties
- gridlock and standstill (gov. shutdowns) = polarization prevents forming political compromises -> resentment and less faith in democracy
- weakening the “guardrails of democracy”: media usually check on gov, but now also polarized and not neutral + judiciary also politicized
examples problems polarization
impeachments Trump: democrat House approved (had majority) but Senate voted agaisnt (Republicans had enough people there)
2022: Roe v. Wade 1973 (guaranteed abortion laws) overturned by Republican dominated Supreme Court
- mostly democrats are unfavorable of the supreme court, republicans are happy with it
2021: US capitol attack bc Trump claimed elections were stolen -> public rallied against Democrat victory
2023: 4 Trump Indictments, Supreme Court did not obstruct candidacy
(article) affective polarization US
diff with ideological polarization:
- ideological polarization = difference between policy positions of Democrats and Republicans = mass public polarized on issues, not parties itself
- affective polarization = polarization based on in- and out-group identification between parties themselves (not about their specific stances) = animosity between parties
party identification -> in- and out-group identification
partisanship as salient/powerful identifier bc:
- acquired at a young age + rarely changes over the life cycle
- political campaigns recur frequently and last for many months in the US
-> Americans see the political world through a partisan prism
(article) measuring affective polarization
- survey self-reports on partisan effect
-> “feeling thermometer”: scale candidates 0 (cold) - 100 (warm)
-> social distance: extent to which individuals feel comfortable interacting with out-group members - implicit or subconscious tests of partisan bias (= more valid)
- behavioral measurements of interpersonal trust and group favoritism/discrimination
(article) causes of affective polarization
increase affective polarization:
- increase % sorted partisans
- high-choice media environment + proliferation partisan news outlets
-> lack of balanced content persuades viewers to adopt extreme ideological positions - mainstream media increasingly focus on polarization (-> more affective polarization, less ideological polarization)
- political campaigns make partisanship more salient
- homogeneous online and offline interpersonal networks
(article) consequences affective polarization
- screening social partners = political homogeneous friends and marriages
also when checked for post-marriage conversion (by looking at dating apps) - price differences + difference in hiring + diff view on eco performance (in vs out-gov party)
- professional decisions: e.g. doctors from different parties different advise on abortion (but not on issues that are not politicized)
- political: evidence affective polarization fuels political activity
(article) how to decrease affective polarization
- correct misperceptions about party supporters -> reduces animosity
e.g. only 2.2% Republicans earn >$250.000 a year - shift salience of partisan identities = emphasize common group “Americans”
- make partisanship and politics less salient
!!sounds easy, isn’t
(article) how does affective polarization threaten representative democracy?
- partisanship appears to compromise the norms and standards we apply to our elected representatives
- leads partisans to call into question the legitimacy of election results
