POPULARITY
4 episodes with American political development
4 episodes with American political development
4 episodes with American political development
4 episodes with American political development
2 episodes with American political development
3 episodes with American political development
3 episodes with American political development
2 episodes with American political development
On the fifty-eighth episode, Shane, Matthew, and Ben are joined by William B. Allen, Professor Emeritus of Political Philosophy at Michigan State University, to discuss Montesquieu's political philosophy and its influence on the American Founding and eighteenth-century British politics. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew K. Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
On the fifty-seventh episode of the Constitutionalist, Shane and Matthew discuss Volume 1, Chapter 2 of Alexis De Tocqueville's "Democracy in America." We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast co-hosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
On the fifty-sixth episode of the Constitutionalist, Shane, Ben, and Matthew discuss Federalist 37, and Madison's teachings on political and epistemological limits. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast co-hosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
Purchase Professor Rasmussen's book here.We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org.The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
On the fifty-fourth episode of the Constitutionalist, Shane, Ben, and Matthew discuss the arguments of Martin Diamond and Herbert Storing in favor of preserving the Electoral College, presented to the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Senate Judiciary Committee in July 1977. The readings may be accessed here: Martin Diamond: http://www.electoralcollegehistory.com/electoral/docs/diamond.pdf Herbert Storing (Chapter 21 in this volume): https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/-toward-a-more-perfect-union_154408483501.pdf?x85095 We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast co-hosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
On the fifty-second episode of the Constitutionalist, Shane, Ben, and Matthew are joined by Jordan Cash, Assistant Professor at the James Madison College at Michigan State University, to discuss Texas's declaration of independence from Mexico, and its annexation by the United States. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
On the fifty-first episode of the Constitutionalist, Shane Leary and Matthew Reising discuss James Madison's Note on Property for the National Gazette, published March 27, 1792 We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
To commemorate the fiftieth episode of The Constitutionalist, Benjamin Kleinerman, Shane Leary, and Matthew Reising discuss the Constitution of 1787. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
On the forty-ninth episode of The Constitutionalist, Benjamin Kleinerman, Shane Leary, and Matthew Reising discuss James Madison's "Notes on Ancient and Modern Confederacies," compiled in 1786, and his early thinking regarding confederacies, union, and the necessity of a new Constitution. We want to hear from you! Constitutionalistpod@gmail.com The Constitutionalist is proud to be sponsored by the Jack Miller Center for Teaching America's Founding Principles and History. For the last twenty years, JMC has been working to preserve and promote that tradition through a variety of programs at the college and K-12 levels. Through their American Political Tradition Project, JMC has partnered with more than 1,000 scholars at over 300 college campuses across the country, especially through their annual Summer Institutes for graduate students and recent PhDs. The Jack Miller Center is also working with thousands of K-12 educators across the country to help them better understand America's founding principles and history and teach them effectively, to better educate the next generation of citizens. JMC has provided thousands of hours of professional development for teachers all over the country, reaching millions of students with improved civic learning. If you care about American education and civic responsibility, you'll want to check out their work, which focuses on reorienting our institutions of learning around America's founding principles. To learn more or get involved, visit jackmillercenter.org. The Constitutionalist is a podcast cohosted by Professor Benjamin Kleinerman, the RW Morrison Professor of Political Science at Baylor University and Founder and Editor of The Constitutionalist Blog, Shane Leary, a graduate student at Baylor University, and Dr. Matthew Reising, a John and Daria Barry Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Princeton University. Each week, they discuss political news in light of its constitutional implications, and explore a unique constitutional topic, ranging from the thoughts and experiences of America's founders and statesmen, historical episodes, and the broader philosophic ideas that influence the American experiment in government.
If you are doing some last minute holiday shopping or resolving to read more books in 2025, we have got you covered. Lindsay Langholz and Christopher Wright Durocher share what books are on their wishlist this holiday season, and Valerie Nannery speaks with Joshua Perry about his novel, Seraphim.Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.orgHost: Lindsay Langholz, Senior Director of Policy and ProgramHost: Christopher Wright Durocher, Vice President of Policy and Program, ACSHost: Valerie Nannery, Senior Director of Policy and Program, ACSGuest: Joshua Perry, Author and Former Connecticut Solicitor GeneralLink: After Misogyny: How the Law Fails Women and What to Do about It, by Julie Suk Link: Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women, by Kate Manne Link: Our Nation at Risk: Election Integrity as a National Security Issue, edited by Julian E. Zelizer and Karen J. Greenberg Link: Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development, by Anthony Michael KreisLink: The Court v. The Voters, by Joshua Douglas Link: Seraphim, by Joshua PerryLink: Vision: A Memoir of Blindness and Justice, by Hon. David TatelLink: Justice Abandoned: How the Supreme Court Ignored the Constitution and Enabled Mass Incarceration, by Rachel BarkowLink: Who Am I to Judge?: Judicial Craft versus Constitutional Theory, by Mark TushnetVisit the Podcast Website: Broken Law PodcastEmail the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.orgFollow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | LinkedIn | YouTube-----------------Broken Law: About the law, who it serves, and who it doesn't.----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2024.
As an academic studying American politics at the University of Chicago, Assistant Professor Ruth Bloch Rubin recognizes she is living in an unprecedented time that future political historians will be studying intently. It is equally a great time to indulge in her political nerdiness with her students. In this episode, Professor Bloch Rubin discusses the importance of feeling driven by one's research focus but also being open to pivoting and adapting to one's experience and social changes.
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
One of the great divides in American judicial scholarship is between legal scholars who take the justices at their word and assume that those words define the law and political scientists who dismiss all judicial arguments as smokescreens for partisan bias or wider political forces. Today's guest has written a book that bridges that divide. In Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development (U California Press, 2024), Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis uses methods from history, law, and political science to theorize and document how politics make American constitutional law and how the courts affect the path of partisan politics. Understanding American constitutional law means looking at the relationship among dominant political coalitions, social movements, and the evolution of constitutional law as prescribed by judges. For Kreis, constitutional doctrine does not exist in a philosophical vacuum – it is a “distillation of partisan politics.” Rejecting the idea that the Constitution's significance and interpretation can be divorced from contemporary political realities, Kreis uses tools from law, history, and American political development to explain how American constitutional law reflects the ideological commitments of dominant political coalitions, the consequences of major public policy choices, and the influences of intervening social movements. For Kreis, constitutional law is “best understood through the diachronic lens of American Political Development (APD) and the concept of political time. Kreis concludes that the courts have never been—and cannot be—institutions lying outside the currents of national politics. Dr. Anthony Michael Kreis is assistant professor at Georgia State University College of Law where he teaches constitutional law and works at the intersection of law and American Political Development. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Washington & Lee University, respectively, and his PhD from the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. Mentioned: President Lyndon B. Johnson's March 15, 1965 speech before Congress on voting rights Keith E. Whittington's Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy and other works Gerald Rosenberg's The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Correction: Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated by President Obama and Justice Jackson was nominated by President Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day
Out of the maybe 20 live events I spoke at in the US recently, only one—one!—was actually recorded and you're about to hear it. About this Event: From the War on Terror to the militarization of the Pacific, and from imperial competition with China to US support for Israeli atrocities in Palestine, the US quest for primacy has devastating consequences globally, and a corrosive impact domestically. Join us for a free flowing conversation about the consequences of endless wars and militarism, rethinking US foreign policy and the implications for the upcoming 2024 elections.Speaker Bios:Spencer Ackerman, the foreign policy columnist for The Nation magazine, is a Pulitzer Prize and National Magazine Award-winning reporter. Focusing on the War on Terror, Ackerman has reported from Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and numerous U.S. bases, ships and submarines as a senior correspondent for outlets like Wired, The Guardian and the Daily Beast. His 2021 book, REIGN OF TERROR: HOW THE 9/11 DESTABILIZED AMERICA AND PRODUCED TRUMP, was named a book of the year by the New York Times Critics, the Washington Post and the PBS NewsHour, and won a 2022 American Book Award. Ackerman writes the popular FOREVER WARS newsletter on Ghost (foreverwars.ghost.io) and recently released the spy thriller graphic novel WALLER VS WILDSTORM for DC Comics.Amel Ahmad is Associate Professor of Political Science at University of Massachusetts Amherst. Her main areas of specialization are democratic studies, with a special interest in elections, voting systems, legislative politics, party development, and voting rights. She is author of Democracy and the Politics of Electoral System Choice: Engineering Electoral Dominance (Cambridge University Press, 2013). Her new book entitled When Democracy Divides: The Regime Question in European and American Political Development, examines the impact of regime contention on political development in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the United States in the 19th and early 20th Centuries.Van Jackson is a senior lecturer in international relations at Victoria University of Wellington, host of The Un-Diplomatic Podcast, and author of The Un-Diplomatic Newsletter. Van's research broadly concerns East Asian and Pacific security, critical analysis of defense issues, and the intersection of working-class interests with foreign policy. He is the author of scores of journal articles, book chapters, and policy reports, as well as four books, including Pacific Power Paradox: American Statecraft and the Fate of the Asian Peace, with Yale University Press (2023) and Grand Strategies of the Left: The Foreign Policy of Progressive Worldmaking, with Cambridge University Press (2023). His fifth book, forthcoming with Yale University Press, is The Rivalry Peril: How Great-Power Competition Threatens Peace and Weakens Democracy (with Michael Brenes). Van is a senior researcher at Security in Context and co-director of the Multipolarity, Great Power Competition and the Global South research track.Omar Dahi is a professor of economics at Hampshire College and director of the Security in Context research network.Subscribe to the Un-Diplomatic Newsletter: https://www.un-diplomatic.comVisit Security in Context: https://www.securityincontext.com
Today on Scope Conditions: when is racial status a unifying force in politics?Shared experiences of prejudice and discrimination can sometimes help create shared political identities within and across racial minority groups and strong incentives for collective mobilization. But as our guest today points out, neither race nor racial-minority status maps neatly onto patterns of political coalition-building. Consider, for instance, the lack of an enduring political alliance between African-American and Afro-Caribbean communities in places like New York City or the absence before the 1970s of a Latino political identity encompassing Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans, and Puerto Ricans.Dr. Jae Yeon Kim, a senior data scientist at Code for America, has been thinking a lot about the conditions under which groups with shared experiences of racialization and discrimination join forces politically, and when political action is organized instead around other social markers like class and ethnicity. In his article “Racism Is Not Enough: Minority Coalition Building in San Francisco, Seattle, and Vancouver,” published in Studies in American Political Development, Jae unpacks a revealing comparison in patterns of mobilization and alliance-formation across the Chinatowns in these three cities. These cities all shared a long history of pervasive and violent anti-Asian racism – which one might have thought would generate a collective race-based political identity. But while Asian coalitions formed to fend off the gentrification of San Francisco's Chinatown, Vancouver's ethnic-Chinese population allied with their southern European neighbors, rather than fellow Asian-Canadians, in their fight for affordable housing.Jae tells us why that is by comparing patterns of residential segregation versus integration that shaped the logic of coalition-building in these three sites. We discuss how he gained analytical leverage for this comparison by looking at different exogenous shocks – natural disasters and duration of Japanese internment – that generated different patterns of settlement.We also talk with Jae about his broader work on how the experience of racism affects political identities and behaviors. We discuss a study he conducted with Nathan Chan and Vivien Leung that shows how Donald Trump's anti-Asian rhetoric affected Asian-Americans' partisan leanings. Jae also tells us about a paper with Reuel Rogers that problematizes the concept of “linked fate” and that analyzes the formation of race-based political identities as contingent processes that hinge heavily on elite strategies and historical dynamics.Works discussed in the episode:Chan, N., Kim, J., & Leung, V. (2022). COVID-19 and Asian Americans: How Elite Messaging and Social Exclusion Shape Partisan Attitudes. Perspectives on Politics, 20(2), 618-634. doi:10.1017/S1537592721003091Dawson, Michael. A Black Counterpublic?: Economic Earthquakes, Racial Agenda(s), and Black Politics. Public Culture 1 January 1994; 7 (1): 195–223Dawson, Michael. Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics (Princeton 1994).Kim, Jae Yeon. "Racism is not enough: Minority coalition building in San Francisco, Seattle, and Vancouver." Studies in American Political Development (2020): 195-215.
Dr. Christy Ford Chapin is Associate Professor of twentieth-century U.S. political, business, and economic history as well as capitalism studies at the University of Maryland-Baltimore County. Chapin has published articles in the Journal of Policy History, Studies in American Political Development, and the Business History Review. Her book, Ensuring America's Health: The Public Creation of the Corporate Health Care System (Cambridge University Press, 2015) won the 2016 Ralph Gomory Prize from the Business History Conference. In this episode, we talk about the history of health insurance in the United States: from its inception in a smoky room in 1940s Chicago to its evolution into its most recent instantiation, the ACA ("Obamacare").
Just an hour before they teamed up to launch a Braver Angels student debate on campus, ACTA's Doug Sprei interviewed Deondra Rose, Associate Professor of Public Policy, Political Science, and History at Duke University. As the Director of Polis: Center for Politics, Professor Rose leads research into higher education policy, American Political Development, political behavior, identity politics, and inequality. She is a dynamic scholar and educator who commands the admiration of students, faculty and staff leadership across Duke University and beyond into American higher ed.
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
How do social movements intersect with the agendas of mainstream political parties? When they are integrated with parties, are they coopted? Or are they more radically transformative? Examining major episodes of contention in American politics – from the Civil War era to the women's rights and civil rights movements to the Tea Party and Trumpism today – Sidney Tarrow tackles these questions and provides a new account of how the interactions between movements and parties have been transformed over the course of American history. In Movements and Parties: Critical Connections in American Political Development (Cambridge UP, 2021), he shows that the relationships between movements and parties have been central to American democratization – at times expanding it and at times threatening its future. Today, movement politics have become more widespread as the parties have become weaker. The future of American democracy hangs in the balance. Professor Sidney Tarrow is Emeritus Maxwell Upson Professor of Government and Adjunct Professor at Cornell Law School. He is a leading expert on social movements and contentious behaviour. He has published more than sixteen books and numerous articles on the movements' political opportunities, social networks, cultural frames, and forms of collective action. Host Ursula Hackett is Senior Lecturer in Politics at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her Cambridge University Press book America's Voucher Politics: How Elites Learned to Hide the State won the 2021 Education Politics and Policy Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association. Her writing guide Brilliant Essays is published by Macmillan Study Skills. She tweets @UrsulaBHackett.
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies
Who governs political parties? Recent insurgent campaigns, such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have thrust this critical question to the center of political debate for casual observers and scholars alike. Yet the dynamics of modern party politics remain poorly understood. Assertions of either elite control or interest group dominance both fail to explain the Trump victory and the surprise of the Sanders insurgency and their subsequent reverberations through the American political landscape. In True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party (U Pennsylvania Press, 2021), Adam Hilton tackles the question of who governs parties by examining the transformation of the Democratic Party since the late 1960s. Reconceiving parties as “contentious institutions,” Hilton argues that Democratic Party change was driven by recurrent conflicts between groups and officeholders to define and control party identity, program, and policy. The outcome of this prolonged struggle was a wholly new kind of party—an advocacy party—which institutionalized greater party dependence on outside groups for legitimacy and organizational support, while also, in turn, fostering greater group dependency on the presidency for the satisfaction of its symbolic and substantive demands. Consequently, while the long conflict between party reformers and counter-reformers successfully opened the Democratic Party to new voices and identities, it also facilitated the growth of presidential power, rising inequality, and deepening partisan polarization. Tracing the rise of the advocacy party from the fall of the New Deal order through the presidency of Barack Obama, True Blues explains how and why the Democratic Party has come to its current crossroads and suggests a bold new perspective for comprehending the dynamics driving American party politics more broadly. Adam Hilton is Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. He earned his PhD from the Department of Political Science at York University, Toronto. His current research focuses on the relationship between movements, interest groups, and political parties, and the agency of political entrepreneurs in transforming them. In addition to True Blues, he is also working on an edited book with Jessica Hejny, tentatively titled Placing Parties in American Political Development. Joe Renouard is Resident Professor of American Studies and Fei Yi-Ming Journalism Foundation Chair of American Government and Comparative Politics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Nanjing, China. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies
Today, the Supreme Court , in a unanamous decision, ruled that Philadelphia may not reject a Catholic organization that refused to work with same-sex couples from screening potential foster parents. We will discuss that ruling with our guests, Stephen M. Engel and Timothy S. Lyle. We will also be talking about their new book DISRUPTING DIGNITY: Rethinking Power and Progress in LGBTQ Lives (NYU Press, June 2021). In the book, they explore how dignity is deployed by different authorities in different ways—and often brandished to marginalize, restrain, and shame members of LGBTQ+ communities. DISRUPTING DIGNITY explores the concept of Respect versus Respectability, with attention to how the chase for dignity has severed LGBTQ+ communities from the potential of liberated worldmaking. Stephen is Professor of Politics and an Affiliated Scholar of the American Bar Foundation. He teaches courses in US constitutional law, American Political Development, and LGBTQ+ politics. He is the author of multiple books including Fragmented Citizens: The Changing Landscape of Gay and Lesbian Lives and American Politicians Confront the Courts: Opposition Politics and Changing Responses to Judicial Power. Timothy (they/them) is an Assistant Professor of English. They specialize in contemporary African American literature and culture, focusing on the intersections of race, gender, sexuality, and disability. They have published work on Tyler Perry in Callaloo and Continuum, on Janet Mock in the College Language Association Journal, Callaloo, and MELUS, and on HIV/AIDS narratives in African American Review and The Journal of West Indian Literature. With co-host Brody Levesque.
Today, the Supreme Court , in a unanamous decision, ruled that Philadelphia may not reject a Catholic organization that refused to work with same-sex couples from screening potential foster parents. We will discuss that ruling with our guests, Stephen M. Engel and Timothy S. Lyle. We will also be talking about their new book DISRUPTING DIGNITY: Rethinking Power and Progress in LGBTQ Lives (NYU Press, June 2021). In the book, they explore how dignity is deployed by different authorities in different ways—and often brandished to marginalize, restrain, and shame members of LGBTQ+ communities. DISRUPTING DIGNITY explores the concept of Respect versus Respectability, with attention to how the chase for dignity has severed LGBTQ+ communities from the potential of liberated worldmaking. Stephen is Professor of Politics and an Affiliated Scholar of the American Bar Foundation. He teaches courses in US constitutional law, American Political Development, and LGBTQ+ politics. He is the author of multiple books including Fragmented Citizens: The Changing Landscape of Gay and Lesbian Lives and American Politicians Confront the Courts: Opposition Politics and Changing Responses to Judicial Power. Timothy (they/them) is an Assistant Professor of English. They specialize in contemporary African American literature and culture, focusing on the intersections of race, gender, sexuality, and disability. They have published work on Tyler Perry in Callaloo and Continuum, on Janet Mock in the College Language Association Journal, Callaloo, and MELUS, and on HIV/AIDS narratives in African American Review and The Journal of West Indian Literature. With co-host Brody Levesque.
Kicking off the week is author of Sinatra and Me, Tony Oppedisano—aka “Tony O”— a former professional musician and singer who went on to become an award-winning producer, served as a member of Frank Sinatra's management team, and also managed comedian Don Rickles. Tony was only twenty-one when he first met and befriended Frank Sinatra. Tony later became the singer's best friend and road manager, a contributor to two of Sinatra's platinum albums, and a producer of the documentary To Be Frank: Sinatra at 100. Tony grew up in Brooklyn, New York, and currently lives in Los Angeles. https://www.simonandschuster.com/authors/Tony-Oppedisano/171537030We're talking true crime with Stuart Sobel, longtime journalist and ghost writer of multiple martial art books. This first time author in the genre of ‘True Crime' was given a rare opportunity for the inside scoop of as yet, a still unsolved gangland killing, that of the notorious mobster “Bugsy” Siegel. That opportunity was offered from a boyhood friend, Robbie Sedway. Sobel was to chronicle Sedway's parents' full story. Bee Sedway, Robbie's mother, married to Mobster “Little” Moe Sedway, revealed the killing of their best friend, Siegel. Sobel interviewed Bee Sedway for almost eight years before she passed away.Also joining the program today is author of DISRUPTING DIGNITY: Rethinking Power and Progress in LGBTQ Lives - STEPHEN M. ENGEL is Professor of Politics at Bates College in Maine and an Affiliated Scholar of the American Bar Foundation. He teaches courses in US constitutional law, American Political Development, and LGBTQ+ politics. He is the author of multiple books including Fragmented Citizens: The Changing Landscape of Gay and Lesbian Lives and American Politicians Confront the Courts: Opposition Politics and Changing Responses to Judicial Power.
In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Wendy Schiller joins Julia, Lee, and James to talk about how we elect senators in the United States. Schiller is Professor of Political Science, Professor of International and Public Affairs, and Chair of Political Science at Brown University. She has also experienced politics as a practitioner, having served on the staffs of Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the Senate and Governor Mario Cuomo in New York. Schiller is the author of several books, including Electing the Senate: Indirect Democracy before the Seventeenth Amendment (Princeton University Press) and Partners and Rivals: Representation in U.S. Senate Delegations (Princeton University Press). And she has published articles in the American Journal of Political Science, Legislative Studies Quarterly, Studies in American Political Development, and the Journal of Politics.What is the best way to pick United States senators? What are the consequences of different modes of electing senators? Does direct election of senators impact their behavior inside the Senate differently than indirect election? What would happen if Americans repealed the 17th Amendment? And why are there two Senate seats up for grabs in Georgia at the same time? These are some of the questions that Wendy, Julia, Lee, and James discuss in this week’s episode.
In this week’s episode of Politics In Question, Philip Wallach joins Julia, Lee, and James to consider how the 2020 elections will impact Congress. Wallach is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute where he studies and writes about the administrative state, Congress, and the separation of powers. He is the author of To the Edge: Legality, Legitimacy, and the Responses to the 2008 Financial Crisis (Brookings Institution Press) and has published articles in numerous publications, including in the Brookings Center on Regulation and Markets, Studies in American Political Development, Fortune, National Affairs, National Review, Law & Liberty, The Los Angeles Times, RealClearPolicy, The American Interest, The Bulwark, The Hill, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. Most recently, Wallach examines how Congress fell behind the executive branch in a chapter in the forthcoming edited volume, Congress Overwhelmed: The Decline in Congressional Capacity and Prospects for Reform.Does it really matter which party controls Congress next year? Will the House and Senate still be dysfunctional if Democrats control both chambers in the 117th Congress? Or is a change in Congress’s partisan balance of power just what it needs for its members to get back to work? These are some of the questions Philip, Julia, Lee, and James ask in this week’s episode.
In this powerful conversation, Prof. Al Tillery, a professor of political science at Northwestern University where he also serves as the Director of the Center for the Study of Diversity and Democracy, talks about the history of systemic racism. He provides his keen insight - personal and professional - to help explain how we get to where we are today. He also shares some incredibly powerful personal stories, including living as a lynching survivor. We end the episode talking about how we can take these lessons learned to improve our workplaces, and Prof. Tillery, ever the optimist, encourages all of us to continue to be hopeful for a better tomorrow!About My Guest: Alvin B. Tillery, Jr. is the principal of Analytic Insights Consulting, LLC. He is an award-winning scholar of diversity and leadership in the field of political science. Tillery holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University. He is the founding director of the Center for the Study of Diversity and Democracy at Northwestern University. His research in American politics focuses on American political development, racial and ethnic politics, and media and politics. His research in political theory focuses on American political thought and critical race theory. His book Between Homeland and Motherland: Africa, U.S. Foreign Policy, and Black Leadership in America (Cornell University Press, 2011) won the W.E.B. Du Bois Distinguished Book Award from the National Conference of Black Political Scientists. His papers have appeared in Studies in American Political Development, Political Research Quarterly, and Journal of Black Studies. He is currently completing a book that examines African-American attitudes toward immigration between 1850 and 1965. Check out Al's website HERECheck out Al's DEI online course HERE About Us: Can you imagine life with no drama? Drawing on wisdom from her Salvadoran immigrant roots, stories from her (almost) 30-year career as an attorney (don't hold that against her), workplace investigator and best-selling author, Patti Perez will make you laugh, cry and think – but most importantly she will motivate you to act by providing practical advice to manage and resolve conflict, at work and beyond.Check out our other services HERE References:In the episode- Al discusses being a lynching survivor. Check out the below links to see how lynching is still prevalent in America today:Washington PostAnti-Racism Daily Al also discusses instances around his father not being able to receive his Veteran Benefits after his service in WWII. Check out the below link to find more information on the history of Black Veteran Benefits: History of Black Veterans BenefitsAdditional Links:Connect on LinkedIn:Patti PerezAlvin Tillery (guest)
Stephen Skowronek (Yale) and Karen Orren (UCLA) argue that the institutional fabric of American government is crumbling. Why is this happening? Is the American political system facing an unsolvable predicament? Tune in to the latest episode of the Governance Podcast featuring Samuel DeCanio (King's College London) and Stephen Skowronek. Subscribe on iTunes and Spotify Subscribe to the Governance Podcast on iTunes and Spotify today and get all our latest episodes directly in your pocket. Follow Us For more information about our upcoming podcasts and events, follow us on facebook or twitter (@csgskcl). The Guest Stephen Skowronek is the Pelatiah Perit Professor of Political and Social Science at Yale University. He has been a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and has held the Chair in American Civilization at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris. His research concerns American national institutions and American political history. His publications include Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877-1920 (1982), The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to Bill Clinton, (1997), The Search for American Political Development (2004, with Karen Orren), and Presidential Leadership in Political Time: Reprise and Reappraisal (2008). Among other activities, he was co-founder of the journal Studies in American Political Development, which he edited between 1986 and 2007, and he provided the episode structure and thematic content for the PBS miniseries: The American President (Kunhardt Productions). About The Book Policy is government's ready response to changing times, the key to its successful adaptation. It tackles problems as they arise, from foreign relations and economic affairs to race relations and family affairs. Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek take a closer look at this well-known reality of modern governance. In The Policy State they point out that policy is not the only way in which America was governed historically, and they describe the transformation that occurred as policy took over more and more of the work of government, emerging as the raison d'être of the state's operation. Rather than analyze individual policies to document this change, Orren and Skowronek examine policy's effect on legal rights and the formal structure of policy-making authority. Rights and structure are the principal elements of government that historically constrained policy and protected other forms of rule. The authors assess the emergence of a new “policy state,” in which rights and structure shed their distinctive characteristics and take on the attributes of policy. Orren and Skowronek address the political controversies swirling around American government as a consequence of policy's expanded domain. On the one hand, the policy state has rendered government more flexible, responsive, and inclusive. On the other, it has mangled government's form, polarized its politics, and sowed deep distrust of its institutions. The policy state frames an American predicament: policy has eroded the foundations of government, even as the policy imperative pushes us ever forward, into an uncertain future. Skip Ahead 0:58: How did you become interested in the historical study of American politics? 3:49: When you initially went to graduate school as a political theorist, were there specific theorists you were interested in studying? 5:18: Do you remember when Theda Skochpol wrote States and Social Revolutions? She was also one of the editors of Bringing the State Back In, published in 1995… Do you remember when that volume came out? How did people view it in political science at the time? 6:40: What led you to write the Policy State? 10:00: Are the conflicts over Obamacare emblematic of the policy state? 11:11: In a certain way you see the form of governance that the policy state is displacing is a stable administrative organization? 13:49: Why do you think this transition to the policy state happened? 18:01: On the one hand, it's good that rights are expanding, more people have access to them, but do you see any potential downsides to this? 20:05: Why couldn't a skeptic just respond and say what you're describing is a responsive, democratic polity? 21:57: Do you see any problems with the expansion of policy, the fact that so many decisions are influenced by so many different actors, do you see that as a problem for democratic legitimacy? 23:40: Do you see any solutions to this problem? 28:54: Given that diagnosis of the contemporary American political scene, do you have any predictions about what's in course? 31:35: Is deliberative democracy a practical solution to the rise of the policy state? 32:37: Where is your research going next?
Ben Epstein’s new book, The Only Constant is Change: Technology, Political Communication, and Innovation over Time (Oxford University Press, 2018), traces communication changes and innovations in the United States from the time of the Founding to the present, while also exploring how and where innovative use of communication becomes viable for political actors. Epstein connects a number of threads within the book, including a qualitative approach to communications studies that makes use of the American Political Development, or APD, framework as the structure to explore the disruptions in technology that allow for new forms of political communication operations to come forward and for political actors to choose to make use of these innovative forms for communication. Making central claims about how technological and political forces disrupt political communication activity and how these disruptions lead to new political communication orders, Epstein also examines who makes the most use of new information and communication technology, and how and where a new political communication order becomes embedded within our daily lives. This is a clearly structured book—detailing the periods of technological revolution and then the responses to those revolutionary periods as the new form of technology becomes normalized within society and also within the political communication arena. There are also some important comparative case studies to help readers understand who may make the most out of new communication approaches, and whether these approaches may, or may not, make that much of a difference. This podcast was hosted by Lilly Goren, Professor of Political Science and Global Studies at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. You can follow her on Twitter @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Ben Epstein’s new book, The Only Constant is Change: Technology, Political Communication, and Innovation over Time (Oxford University Press, 2018), traces communication changes and innovations in the United States from the time of the Founding to the present, while also exploring how and where innovative use of communication becomes viable for political actors. Epstein connects a number of threads within the book, including a qualitative approach to communications studies that makes use of the American Political Development, or APD, framework as the structure to explore the disruptions in technology that allow for new forms of political communication operations to come forward and for political actors to choose to make use of these innovative forms for communication. Making central claims about how technological and political forces disrupt political communication activity and how these disruptions lead to new political communication orders, Epstein also examines who makes the most use of new information and communication technology, and how and where a new political communication order becomes embedded within our daily lives. This is a clearly structured book—detailing the periods of technological revolution and then the responses to those revolutionary periods as the new form of technology becomes normalized within society and also within the political communication arena. There are also some important comparative case studies to help readers understand who may make the most out of new communication approaches, and whether these approaches may, or may not, make that much of a difference. This podcast was hosted by Lilly Goren, Professor of Political Science and Global Studies at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. You can follow her on Twitter @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Ben Epstein’s new book, The Only Constant is Change: Technology, Political Communication, and Innovation over Time (Oxford University Press, 2018), traces communication changes and innovations in the United States from the time of the Founding to the present, while also exploring how and where innovative use of communication becomes viable for political actors. Epstein connects a number of threads within the book, including a qualitative approach to communications studies that makes use of the American Political Development, or APD, framework as the structure to explore the disruptions in technology that allow for new forms of political communication operations to come forward and for political actors to choose to make use of these innovative forms for communication. Making central claims about how technological and political forces disrupt political communication activity and how these disruptions lead to new political communication orders, Epstein also examines who makes the most use of new information and communication technology, and how and where a new political communication order becomes embedded within our daily lives. This is a clearly structured book—detailing the periods of technological revolution and then the responses to those revolutionary periods as the new form of technology becomes normalized within society and also within the political communication arena. There are also some important comparative case studies to help readers understand who may make the most out of new communication approaches, and whether these approaches may, or may not, make that much of a difference. This podcast was hosted by Lilly Goren, Professor of Political Science and Global Studies at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. You can follow her on Twitter @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Ben Epstein’s new book, The Only Constant is Change: Technology, Political Communication, and Innovation over Time (Oxford University Press, 2018), traces communication changes and innovations in the United States from the time of the Founding to the present, while also exploring how and where innovative use of communication becomes viable for political actors. Epstein connects a number of threads within the book, including a qualitative approach to communications studies that makes use of the American Political Development, or APD, framework as the structure to explore the disruptions in technology that allow for new forms of political communication operations to come forward and for political actors to choose to make use of these innovative forms for communication. Making central claims about how technological and political forces disrupt political communication activity and how these disruptions lead to new political communication orders, Epstein also examines who makes the most use of new information and communication technology, and how and where a new political communication order becomes embedded within our daily lives. This is a clearly structured book—detailing the periods of technological revolution and then the responses to those revolutionary periods as the new form of technology becomes normalized within society and also within the political communication arena. There are also some important comparative case studies to help readers understand who may make the most out of new communication approaches, and whether these approaches may, or may not, make that much of a difference. This podcast was hosted by Lilly Goren, Professor of Political Science and Global Studies at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. You can follow her on Twitter @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Ben Epstein's new book, The Only Constant is Change: Technology, Political Communication, and Innovation over Time (Oxford University Press, 2018), traces communication changes and innovations in the United States from the time of the Founding to the present, while also exploring how and where innovative use of communication becomes viable for political actors. Epstein connects a number of threads within the book, including a qualitative approach to communications studies that makes use of the American Political Development, or APD, framework as the structure to explore the disruptions in technology that allow for new forms of political communication operations to come forward and for political actors to choose to make use of these innovative forms for communication. Making central claims about how technological and political forces disrupt political communication activity and how these disruptions lead to new political communication orders, Epstein also examines who makes the most use of new information and communication technology, and how and where a new political communication order becomes embedded within our daily lives. This is a clearly structured book—detailing the periods of technological revolution and then the responses to those revolutionary periods as the new form of technology becomes normalized within society and also within the political communication arena. There are also some important comparative case studies to help readers understand who may make the most out of new communication approaches, and whether these approaches may, or may not, make that much of a difference. This podcast was hosted by Lilly Goren, Professor of Political Science and Global Studies at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. You can follow her on Twitter @gorenlj.
Ben Epstein’s new book, The Only Constant is Change: Technology, Political Communication, and Innovation over Time (Oxford University Press, 2018), traces communication changes and innovations in the United States from the time of the Founding to the present, while also exploring how and where innovative use of communication becomes viable for political actors. Epstein connects a number of threads within the book, including a qualitative approach to communications studies that makes use of the American Political Development, or APD, framework as the structure to explore the disruptions in technology that allow for new forms of political communication operations to come forward and for political actors to choose to make use of these innovative forms for communication. Making central claims about how technological and political forces disrupt political communication activity and how these disruptions lead to new political communication orders, Epstein also examines who makes the most use of new information and communication technology, and how and where a new political communication order becomes embedded within our daily lives. This is a clearly structured book—detailing the periods of technological revolution and then the responses to those revolutionary periods as the new form of technology becomes normalized within society and also within the political communication arena. There are also some important comparative case studies to help readers understand who may make the most out of new communication approaches, and whether these approaches may, or may not, make that much of a difference. This podcast was hosted by Lilly Goren, Professor of Political Science and Global Studies at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. You can follow her on Twitter @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Ben Epstein’s new book, The Only Constant is Change: Technology, Political Communication, and Innovation over Time (Oxford University Press, 2018), traces communication changes and innovations in the United States from the time of the Founding to the present, while also exploring how and where innovative use of communication becomes viable for political actors. Epstein connects a number of threads within the book, including a qualitative approach to communications studies that makes use of the American Political Development, or APD, framework as the structure to explore the disruptions in technology that allow for new forms of political communication operations to come forward and for political actors to choose to make use of these innovative forms for communication. Making central claims about how technological and political forces disrupt political communication activity and how these disruptions lead to new political communication orders, Epstein also examines who makes the most use of new information and communication technology, and how and where a new political communication order becomes embedded within our daily lives. This is a clearly structured book—detailing the periods of technological revolution and then the responses to those revolutionary periods as the new form of technology becomes normalized within society and also within the political communication arena. There are also some important comparative case studies to help readers understand who may make the most out of new communication approaches, and whether these approaches may, or may not, make that much of a difference. This podcast was hosted by Lilly Goren, Professor of Political Science and Global Studies at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. You can follow her on Twitter @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Professor Joseph Lowndes is the guest on this week's episode of The Chauncey DeVega Show. He is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Oregon and the author of several books and articles including From the New Deal to the New Right: Race and the Southern Origins of Modern Conservatism as well as Race and American Political Development. In this wide ranging conversation, Joe and Chauncey discuss topics such as America's "post-post racial" present and future, the challenge of reconciling history, the past, and the present along the color line, the role of black and brown conservatives in the neo liberal conservative agenda, and the symbolism and shortcomings of the Obama presidency. During this installment of The Chauncey DeVega Show, Chauncey complains about having to pay taxes (and is angry at the global plutocrats who do not), and talks about Ted Cruz's college onanism habit, shares a story about his college roommate having sex with a strange woman who had a broken arm, and is excited about potentially receiving IRS tax exempt status for his new religion "porkism".
Guest - Jeffery Berry, Tufts University Host - Maurice Cunningham, UMass Boston
Prof. Ceaser has written several books on American politics and political thought, including "Presidential Selection", "Liberal Democracy and Political Science", "Reconstructing America", and "Nature and History in American Political Development". He has held visiting professorships at the University of Florence, the University of Basel, Oxford University, the University of Bordeaux, and the University of Rennes. He is also a frequent contributor to the popular press.
Prof. Ceaser has written several books on American politics and political thought, including "Presidential Selection", "Liberal Democracy and Political Science", "Reconstructing America", and "Nature and History in American Political Development". He has held visiting professorships at the University of Florence, the University of Basel, Oxford University, the University of Bordeaux, and the University of Rennes. He is also a frequent contributor to the popular press.
Richard Valelly, Professor of Political Science at Swarthmore College and Contributor of the 2012 Annual Review of Political Science, talks to Anna Rascouët-Paz about his article LGBT Politics and American Political Development.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
