Daniel Elazar, Bogus or Brilliant: A Study of Political Culture Across the American States :: Politics Political Science Essays

Daniel Elazar, Bogus or Brilliant A Study of Political Culture Across the American States American alleges each have individual policy-making nicetys which argon consequential to our understanding of their political environments, behavior, and responses to particular issues. While voters probably do non consciously think about political culture and conform to that culture on election day, they seem to form cohesive clusters in contrastive areas of the state, creating similar group political ideologies. Because of these similarities, it is possible to account the controlling political culture within states or areas of a state, gaining insight into the mind-set of state residents. Whatever the state culture, whether liberal or conservative, participatory or exclusive, political culture identifies dominant, state-wide trends. The question remains whether there is an accurate way to total this political culture phenomenon in the unify States.Many studies try to measure politica l culture within states, but some political scientists are wary of assigning state political cultures because such measurements may be of dubious empirical grounding. While the process may not be entirely empirically sound, different state political cultures seem to inhabit and demand further analysis. In 1966, Daniel Elazar published his now famous discernment of United States political cultures. His evaluation of state cultures has been the focus of much say and criticism over the past one-third decades. Elazar proposes that the political culture in the United States developed in different regions repayable to east to western hemisphere migratory patterns moving across the continent. Patterns of political culture were established during the westerly frontier migration, as individuals followed lines of least resistance which generally led them due west from the immediately previous area of settlement (Elazar, 1966 99). As a result, like-minded individuals migrated together an d stayed together, causing similar political ideology to commute into a dominant political culture (Elazar, 1994).Political cultures are dominant in certain areas of the country due to westward expansion. Moralism characterizes communitarian-agrarian New England and the utmost northern states, while the agrarianism of the middle states is individualistic. Traditionalism dominates the South and its plantation agrarianism structure. Typically, moralistic political cultures focus on agrarianism, individualism on commerce, and traditionalism on aristocratic legitimacy. These differing foci help to categorize Elazars political cultures in the United States (Elazar 1984 119, 122).Elazars political culture typology divides state political culture into three dominant categories moralist, individualist, and traditionalist. Moralists measure government by its commitment to the public ethical and concern for public welfare.