Political Science Quarterly

Published by Wiley
Online ISSN: 1538-165X
Print ISSN: 0032-3195
This paper investigates American public opinion supporting human rights and willingness to engage in economic behavior consistent with such support. We look at three types of rights in particular: freedom of expression, freedom from torture, and the right to a guaranteed minimum standard of living. The current literature on human rights largely ignores public opinion, and vice versa. Based on our analysis of a 2006 national survey, we find that more Americans believe in a broader range of human rights (including economic rights) than has previously been assumed. We also find that most Americans report that they are willing to spend more on goods produced ethically and that those who are supportive of human rights may be more willing to pay for such goods. Our findings have implications for theories and practice of human rights, and for development of new markets for ethical consumption.
The penal system has played a central role in the North Korean government's response to the country's profound economic and social changes. As the informal market economy has expanded, so have the scope of economic crimes. Two refugee surveys--one conducted in China, one in South Korea--document that the regime disproportionately targets politically suspect groups, and particularly those involved in market-oriented economic activities. Levels of violence and deprivation do not appear to differ substantially between the infamous political prison camps, penitentiaries for felons, and labor camps used to incarcerate individuals for a growing number of economic crimes. Such a system may also reflect ulterior motives. High levels of discretion with respect to arrest and sentencing and very high costs of detention, arrest and incarceration encourage bribery; the more arbitrary and painful the experience with the penal system, the easier it is for officials to extort money for avoiding it. These characteristics not only promote regime maintenance through intimidation, but may facilitate predatory corruption as well.
Charles P. Kindleberger is widely regarded as among the most accessible and intelligent practitioners of the economist's craft. This collection of his papers and lectures, articles and reviews, prepared over the past decade, focuses on the role of multinational corporations in the international economy, their relationships with home and host countries (both developed and less developed), the determinants of their size, the impetus to their investment behavior, their history, the literature about them, and their regulation. Chapters relate the phenomenon of the multinational corporation to the body of economic theory. They discuss multinational corporations in world affairs, size of firm and size of nation, the clash of economics and sociology and politics in the internationalization of business, restrictions on direct investment in host countries, direct investment in less developed countries and in militant developing nations, ownership and contract in international business, and multinationals and the small open economy. The origins of United States direct investment in France, and international banks and international business are taken up, followed by Kindleberger's reviews of major books on the multinational corporation and including his criticisms of such popular writing as Barnet and Moller's Global Reach, and Magdoff's Age of Imperialism. Kindleberger's policy statements before various national and international governments, in which he proposes the creation of a loose framework among national authorities to harmonize policies toward the multinational corporation are also included.
RYAN C. HENDRICKSON looks at the interplay between Congress and the president over war powers. He argues that despite the presence of an ostensibly assertive and highly partisan Congress in foreign policy, the Republicans followed the congressional norm of deferring to the commander in chief in his desire to deploy U.S. forces to Bosnia.
Compares the causes of the two biggest U.S. intelligence failures of recent times. In one case, warning was insufficient; in the other, excessive. In one case, the obstacles to success were less carelessness in professionals performance than inherent limitations in the warning function. In the other, error came from intelligence trying to be useful more than being strictly accurate.
Hilde Haaland Kramer and Steve A. Yetiv argue that the UN Security Council's response to global terrorism has been more forceful and comprehensive since September 11 and that it has broken some new ground. The authors posit that although the UN remains controversial in the United States, Washington benefited from its response to September 11, as imperfect as it was.
CHRISTOPHER HEMMER examines the impact of September 11 on the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq. He also explores the potential dangers for American foreign policy that could result from an over-active interventionist policy.
AMY B. ZEGART examines the failures to reform U.S. intelligence agencies before the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks. She finds that during the 1990s, intelligence officials and policy makers understood the rising terrorist threat and the urgent need for reform, but failed to address critical organizational deficiencies.
FIONA B. ADAMSON examines the relationship between democratization and war through a study of Turkish foreign policy making during the 1974 Cyprus crisis. She finds that, contrary to the claims of the democratic peace literature, elections and increased popular participation did not facilitate but rather inhibited a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
Demetrios James Caraley analyzes three key trends over the last eight presidential elections: the ending of party dealignment but without the emergence of a new majority party coalition, the geographic realignments making the South solid Republican and the Northeast and Pacific coast solid Democratic, and the volatility that has taken place among various politically relevant social and demographic groups. He also discusses whether the election of Barack Obama as president with the simultaneous election of solid Democratic majorities in the House and Senate signal a coming of a new majority Democratic realignment.
GARY R. HESS compares the leadership of Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush in dealing with the issue of congressional war authorization resolutions in 1991 and 2002. He finds that Bush II operated from a much stronger political position reminiscent of the "imperial presidency" — partially the result of a weakened Democratic Party in Congress.
DANIEL BYMAN argues that criticism of U.S. policy toward Iraq is often overstated and fails to appreciate the accomplishments of the Bush and Clinton administrations. The author discusses which mechanisms have proven particularly effective but also analyzes the room for improvement in U.S. policy.
ANDREW SCOBELL analyses the 1995-96 Taiwan Strait crisis as a case study in coercive diplomacy. He focuses on the role of the Chinese People's Liberation Army and discusses the implications of the case for the future of cross-strait ties and Sino-American relations.
HERBERT L. ABRAMS and RICHARD BRODY examine the issue of Robert Dole's age and health in the 1996 election and its impact on the vote of the electorate. They conclude that among the voters for whom age was an important consideration, most believed that age was a potential obstacle to Dole having a successful presidency. They fault the media for not seriously discussing the possibility that Dole might not last out his term because of illness, disability or death.
SCOT SCHRAUFNAGEL and JEFFERY J. MONDAK use survey data from Project Vote Smart to compare the issue positions of Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. House. Results reveal significant differences in eighteen of nineteen issues. The divide between the parties most often is moderate in magnitude and consistent with a depiction of the parties as center-left and center-right.
Mark A. Wolfgram discusses the costs of early failures in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the United Nations mission in Kosovo after June 1999. The failure of NATO and the UN to secure basic human rights for Kosovo's non-Albanian minorities raises serious questions about the future of similar militarized humanitarian interventions.
Theodore P. Gerber and Sarah E. Mendelson analyze Russian public opinion about the second war in Chechnya. They show that concern over Russian military casualties and the war's economic costs were the dominant sentiments, despite the Russian government's monopoly on media coverage of the conflict. Moreover, they argue that the war appears to have fueled ethnic animosity toward Chechens.
GARY C. JACOBSON argues that the results of the 2002 congressional election were consistent with past midterm elections as referenda on the administration and the economy, although the terrorist attacks of September 11 profoundly affected the referendum's substance. The modest Republican victory was a consequence of the post-September 11 rally in support for President George W. Bush, redistricting (in the House), and higher turnout among Republican loyalists. There was no evidence of any national shift in public sentiment toward the Republican party.
GARY C. JACOBSON analyzes the results of the 2004 United States House, Senate, and presidential elections, arguing that the Republicans' gains did not reflect any shift in public sentiments in that party's favor, but rather were the result of the Republicans' structural advantages, reinforced by the intense partisan polarization provoked by the Bush administration.
JAMES E. CAMPBELL examines how pre-campaign fundamentals and the campaign affected the 2004 presidential election. Incumbency, high turnout, and concerns that Kerry would not handle the war on terrorism as well as Bush tipped the electorate toward President Bush. An electorate evenly divided in its partisanship, the economy, conflicting views about Iraq, and the debates made the election one of the closest in modern party history.
GARY C. JACOBSON analyzes the 2006 midterm election as a referendum on the performance of President Bush, the war in Iraq, and the Republican Congress. He argues that the Democrats won control of Congress by nationalizing the election and exploiting widespread public discontent with the Republican regime to overcome the Republicans' formidable structural advantage in present-day electoral politics.
Gary C. Jacobson analyzes the 2008 presidential and congressional elections. He concludes that the elections were, through myriad pathways, largely a referendum on the Bush administration and a reaction to the economic meltdown. He questions whether Democratic Party control of the presidency and Congress will be a stable phenomenon.
Gary C. Jacobson analyzes the 2010 midterm election as a referendum on the Obama administration, driven fundamentally by the economy, but intensified by the deep animosity of the President's opponents, the Republicans' success in nationalizing the election, and the political failure of Obama's legislative successes.
Harvey B. Feigenbaum discusses the economic and cultural reasons for the spread of American pop culture and finds that political complaints by many countries about “Americanization” are well founded.
DANIEL SABBAGH contends that it is the visibility of affirmative action decisions that triggers negative side effects as far as its underlying goal of deracializing American society is concerned. He suggests that some of the most important developments in the Supreme Court's case law can be understood as reflecting a tendency to minimize those negative side effects by dissimulating the policy's most distinctive features.
Uri Bar-Joseph and Jack S. Levy look at the different ways in which the conscious distortion of information and the politicization of intelligence can lead to intelligence failure. They apply their categories to the Soviet failure to anticipate the German attack in 1941 and to the Israeli failure to anticipate the Arab attack in 1973.
Michele E. Commercio discusses Russian political mobilization in post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan and Latvia. She concludes that contentious voice is more likely to emerge when dissatisfied groups have an unambiguous source of blame for their grievances, while amicable voice is more likely to emerge when such groups lack an obvious target of blame.
BRUCE J. DICKSON analyzes the political consequences of economic reform in China by looking at the Chinese Communist party's efforts to recruit technical experts and entrepreneurs into the party. These strategies of cooptation and corporatism are designed to help the party to adapt, but they are also creating tensions with its Leninist nature that may undermine the party's authority rather than rejuvenate it.
WALT VANDERBUSH and PATRICK J. HANEY examine the dynamics of making U.S. policy toward Cuba during the first Clinton administration. They argue that, rather than being dominated by the executive and a powerful ethnic interest group, in this period Cuba policy became enmeshed in electoral politics and a struggle for foreign policy power between the Congress and the president.
Stanley A. Renshon analyzes the probable psychological baseline contours of a Barack Obama or John McCain presidency. He explores the psychology, worldview, and approach to leadership that are likely to inform and shape the presidency of each candidate in the context of his own developmental history and the psychology of public expectations and concerns.
Donald R. Brand examines the relationship between the Brownlow Report and James Landis's The Administrative Process. He argues that both of the interlocutors in this implicit debate have valuable insights, but that both are ultimately insufficient because they are not attentive to the constitutional and political context of administration.
David R. Mayhew examines U.S. presidential elections from 1788 through 2004. He highlights the importance of incumbency advantage. He concludes that in-office parties have kept the White House two-thirds of the time when they have run incumbent candidates, but they have fared only 50-50 in open-seat elections.
RICHARD BETTS argues that the September 11 attacks were a response to American primacy and then applies offense-defense theory to explain the intense advantages that terrorist groups have in launching offensive strikes and in exploiting the defenses that a nation can put up in this era of globalization and asymmetric warfare.
FRED I. GREENSTEIN and RICHARD H. IMMERMAN provide an account of the impressively rigorous process of national security policy planning in the Eisenhower presidency. They commend it as a model for the next administration.
ARTHUR SCHLESINGER, JR. argues that the Eisenhower heavily-layered national security apparatus did not produce a coherent foreign policy and did not save the administration from gross errors. He believes that future presidents would benefit from a more flexible approach—such as those of FDR and JFK—to the conduct of foreign affairs.
Juan Cole analyses political and economic developments in contemporary Pakistan and Afghanistan. He argues that Western preoccupation with “crisis” and “radicalism” in Pakistan has caused observers to miss the success of an expanding white-collar middle class in demanding a rule of law and a return to civilian rule after nearly a decade of military dictatorship. He questions the idea that there is a purely military, and especially Western military, solution to the problem of Talibanism in northwest Pakistan and southern Afghanistan, analyzing the insurgency as several distinct groups driven in part by religious nationalism and anti-imperialism.
ALAN J. KUPERMAN challenges the traditional assessment of the U.S. decision to supply Stinger antiaircraft missiles to the Afghan Mujahedin resistance during the Soviet occupation of the 1980s. He exposes the bureaucratic politics behind this decision, rejects as myth the popular notion that the Stingers forced Soviet withdrawal, and examines how the CIA's faulty implementation contributed to long-term threats to U.S. national security.
PETER J. SCHRAEDER examines the rise and evolution of U.S.-French competition in francophone Africa. He concludes that this case is indicative of the emergence of a cold peace in which the great powers struggle for economic supremacy in the highly competitive economic environment of the post-cold war.
MARGARET HANSON and JAMES J. HENTZ examine the negotiations over the ownership of neoliberal economic policy ideas diffused by international financial institutions in Zambia and South Africa. Domestic policy dialogues prove to be an important mechanism through which political coalitions identify with new policies and are a more effective mechanism for domestic policy change than is external financial coercion.
Stephen J. King focuses on how incumbent elites in the Arab world create political support during periods of authoritarian transformation. His argument highlights how these elites use certain institutions to sustain authoritarian rule.
PETER VONDOEPP examines why elected officials in the new African democracies of Malawi and Zambia have had persistent trouble controlling judicial institutions. He argues that political conditions in these countries limit the types of techniques that such officials can employ to rein in judiciaries. Political conditions also provide incentives for judges to adopt positions of neutrality when rendering decisions in political cases.
NORMA J. KRIGER evaluates three recent books on Robert Mugabe's violent rule in Zimbabwe. The authors offer different perspectives on Mugabe's motives for power and on the relationship between his use of violence in the liberation war against white rule and his postindependence violence.
EVELYN M. SIMIEN posits that black feminist consciousness arises from an understanding of intersecting patterns of discrimination. Using data from the 1993-1994 National Black Politics Study (NBPS), she develops and validates a measure of black feminist consciousness. Along the way, she considers whether the level of support for black feminist consciousness differs across gender.
Top-cited authors
Andrea Vindigni
  • Università degli Studi di Genova
Gary C. Jacobson
  • University of California, San Diego
Garry Rodan
  • The University of Queensland
Lyle Scruggs
  • University of Connecticut
Shareen Hertel
  • University of Connecticut