The Prime Minister's mailbag

Abstract. This study is based on examination of a randomly selected sample of 2,150 letters representing all the mail received by Prime Minister Trudeau between February 1969 and June 1972. The object of the study was to ascertain the characteristics of the letter-writers and the nature of their concerns, arguments and strategies. Through interviews with the staff of the Correspondence Section of the Prime Minister's Office we were also able to discover how the mail is processed. This is described in the last section of our paper. As one might expect, the mail is unrepresentative of the regional, linguistic and class diversity of Canada. Metropolitan areas, rich provinces and English-speakers are over-represented, as are people who have access to typewriters. There is, however, a sizable group of letters from the very poor who write the Prime Minister to complain of their victimization by government bureaucracy or by life in general. These letters are personal and apolitical and approach the Prime Minister in a deferential manner. They appear to us to be carefully and sympathetically answered, and to be probably effective in rectifying small problems. The bulk of the mail is policy-oriented, but probably not effective in influencing policy. Public attention to policy, as expressed in the mail, is extremely transitory and focuses particularly on topics with strong emotional content or on those affecting economic welfare. The mail seems only weakly related to the government's own policy priorities. Sommaire. Cette étude est fondée sur un échantillon de 2,150 lettres tirées du courrier par le premier ministre Trudeau entire février 1969 et juin 1972. Nous avons voulu identifier les catégories de personnes qui s'adressaient au premier ministre, et déterminer le but de leur correspondence et la nature de leur argumentation etc. Nous avons interviewé le personnel de la section de la correspondance du cabinet du premier ministre pour connaître la procédure de réponse à ce courrier. Nous avons constaté que le courrier n'est pas représentatif de la diversité régionale, culturelle et sociale du pays. Les plus fortunés, les habitants des grandes villes, et les habitants des provinces sont surreprésentés. II y a, cependant, une proportion assez élevée de lettres venant d'économiquement faibles qui se plaignent au premier ministre de leur traitement par la bureaucratic ou de la vie en générate. Leurs problèmes sont formulés en termes personnels, et ces personnes s'adressent au premier ministre respectueusement. Les réponses à ces lettres nous paraissent sympathiques et souvent efficacies quant au redressement des plaintes. Le gros du courrier concerne l'orientation de la politique mais son influence est sans doute limitée. L'attention du public à l'égard de la politique gouvernementale est conditionnée par les évènements, en particulier les évènements à contenu émotif ou ceux qui touchent de près le bien-être des correspondants. Ce courrier ne se réfère que très indirectement aux priorités politiques du gouveniement.     

Gender and Gender-Role Orientation Differences on Adolescents' Coping with Peer Stressors

Gender and gender-role orientation differences were explored on adolescents' coping with peer stressors. Eighth-grade and ninth-grade public junior high school students (N = 285) completed the COPE, reporting the strategies they recently used to deal with a stressful peer-related situation. Measures of gender-role orientation (Bem Sex-Role Inventory) and demographic information also were obtained. Factor analysis of the COPE revealed 4 distinct coping factors: active, avoidant, acceptance, and emotion-focused. The most frequently reported stressful event was arguments/fights with same-sex friends. Girls reported more arguments/fights with opposite-sex friends. Boys reported more physical fights and threats. Students' ratings of how much the situation mattered were used as a covariate in a MANCOVA to compare coping by gender and gender-role orientation, to control for perceived stressfulness of situations. Significant gender-role orientation differences were found for active, acceptance, and emotion-focused coping.     

<Emphasis Type="Italic">Sheldon S. Wolin:</Emphasis> Tocqueville between two worlds: The making of a political and theoretical life

Ohne Zusammenfassung

---

Sheldon S. Wolin: Tocqueville between two worlds: The making of a political and theoretical life Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press 2001, 650 S., $ 24,95

     

Selbstentfesselung in kleinen Schritten? Deutschlands Außenpolitik zu Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts

Ohne Zusammenfassung Der Beitrag wurde bereits Anfang Januar 2003 abgeschlossen und konnte bis Mitte Februar nur noch geringfügig erg?nzt werden. Der Verfasser ist Herrn Fariborz Zelli, M.A., für seine Mithilfe bei der Vorbereitung dieses Essays zu gro?em Dank verpflichtet.     

Justice and Culture: Rawls, Sen, Nussbaum and O'Neill

Is it possible, in a multicultural world, to hold all societies to a common standard of decency that is both high enough to protect basic human interests, and yet not biased in the direction of particular cultural values? We examine the recent work of four liberals – John Rawls, Amartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum and Onora O'Neill – to see whether any of them has given a successful answer to this question. For Rawls, the decency standard is set by reference to an idea of basic human rights that we argue offers too little protection to members of non-liberal societies. Sen and Nussbaum both employ the idea of human capabilities, but in interestingly different ways: for Sen the problems are how to weight different capabilities, and how to decide which are basic, whereas for Nussbaum the difficulty is that her favoured list of capabilities depends on an appeal to autonomy that is unlikely to be acceptable to non-liberal cultures. O'Neill rejects a rights-based approach in favour of a neo-Kantian position that asks which principles of action people everywhere could consent to, but this also may be too weak in the face of cultural diversity. We conclude that liberals need to argue both for a minimum decency standard and for the full set of liberal rights as the best guarantors of that standard over time.