Making moral citizens: On Himmelfarb's de‐moralization thesis

One of the most popular and pressing problems in the attempts of contemporary Western social and cultural commentators to understand these times is the question of whether it is possible to identify a worrisome and unstoppable process of de‐moralization. This process is frequently taken to involve the cutting of the ties and identities of citizenship so that individuals are left to wallow in swamps of anomie and disrepute; swamps in which the supposed achievements of civilization are undermined by the reappearance of activities which are taken to be more reminiscent of the mythical state of nature. In this article I will examine one of the most well‐developed and intellectually plausible versions of this de‐moralization thesis. I will outline and attempt to contextualize arguments rehearsed by Gertrude Himmelfarb in her book The Demoralization of Society (Himmelfarb, 1995). I hope to show that the de‐moralization thesis is based upon a specific articulation of citizenship to civilization. I will then offer aspects of a sociological critique of Himmelfarb and, implicitly therefore, of the connection of citizenship to civilizaton. I will develop this possible critique through an account of some themes contained in the work of Zygmunt Bauman.     

Comparative public adminstration: The United States view in international perspective

In the study of comparative public administration in the United States, there are currently four directions of development associated with bureaucratic and policy models, case and component approaches, the comparative study of organizations, and application. The characteristics of these developments are outlined in this article, recent publications surveyed and future trends discussed. The extent to which there is a peculiarly American or Western tradition in the comparative study of administration is considered and issue is taken with the argument presented by Dwivedi and Nef (1982) for greater autonomy.     

The vice-presidential succession effect: Individual or situational basis?

Simonton (1981) found that accidental presidents do not perform as well as duly elected chief executives. Though this vice-presidential succession effect may be due to individual factors, such as some deficiency in personality or political experience, it might be due instead to situational factors, most notably the failure to be perceived as having legitimate power by those already in power positions. Three studies investigated the relative plausibility of individual and situational explanations. Study 1 examined 49 president-vice-president teams to determine the criteria by which running mates are selected. Study 2 looked at 69 leaders who served as either president, vice-president, or both, in order to discover if accidental presidents can be differentiated on biographical and political background variables. Study 3 scrutinized 100 congressional units in a time-series design to gauge the impact of serving an unelected term as president. The results most support a situational interpretation based on the attribution of legitimate power.     

The dynamics of interest group evaluations of Congress

We apply a dynamic spatial model to interest group ratings of the members of Congress over the period 1959–1981. Spatial distances between an interest group and the members of Congress are assumed to be monotonic with the ratings. Our pooled cross-sectional time-series data set consists of 203,387 ratings by 59 interest groups. We restrict the spatial coordinates of the interest groups and members of Congress to be polynomial functions of time. Two significant dimensions are recovered: the first dimension, which accounts for approximately 75% of the variance, represents liberal-conservative positions on economic issues; the second dimension, which accounts for approximately an additional 5% of the variance, represents liberal-conservative positions on social issues. Nearly all the interest groups and most members of Congress are ideologically consistent. They are either liberal on both dimensions or conservative on both.