Seymour Martin LipsetRezensionen

12/6/22

Lipset’s generalizations about “political man” use historical examples in a non-historical way. For example, he maintains that McCarthyism, nineteenth century liberalism and Poujadism are primarily the reactions of the small businessman. In fact, nineteenth century liberalism was against reactionary populism of the kind represented later by McCarthyism and Poujadism. He seems incapable of seeing the difference between historical and sociological thinking. He sees historical facts as just another measurement to throw into a formula. But repeating factoids does not grasp overarching developments that play a crucial role in political life. For example, the fact that Hitler was able to impose himself upon Germany clearly had a great deal to do with German nationalist reaction to the losses of World War I. In short, what counts is the exact moment on the time curve, and the historical situation of which such moments are part. As a result, Lipset’s conceptual apparatus is not really attuned to the serious business of generalizing about politics. [1960]

Fascinating book. On the surface Canada and the U.S. are similar enough that people speak their names in the same breath. In fact there are startling and complex differences. Well worth the read.

Wow! This book was remarkable in that it was probably the dullest book I've ever read. I am a Socialist and I was very interested in the information these authors had to share, but it was so god damn academic and dry that I couldn't read it for more than 10 minutes at a time.

I'm not sure who the audience is supposed to be for this book. "Beginners" to the themes within (Socialism, labor unions, the electoral college, immigration etc.) would be completely overwhelmed and confused, because the authors make no attempt to clarify background information. That would be fine if the book was geared towards people who already have a solid foundation of these issues, but the reasons the authors come up with are nothing new to those of us who have studied the Socialist party in this country.

On the upside, I will say that this book was extensively researched. For every point they made, they had pages and pages and pages (and pages!) of graphs and studies and examples to back up their assertions. I can see this being a useful resource for someone writing a paper, but it was definitely way too academic and zzzzzzzz for anyone who's simply interested in the subject.

American Jews: survival as a group or assimilation. Topics include identity, social condition, politics and government, ethnic relations

Good comparative study of the intellectual, historical and philosophical underpinning of U.S. society as seen through the lens of American ideas of U.S. exceptionalism or difference. Comparison with Japanese cultural attitudes is particularly useful. Generally well-written, though plagued by clumsy passages at times. A good source book, a good general intro to the subject.

Perhaps especially interesting for brief sections that explore the thinking of some advisors and public figures, like Richard Perleman, who later (well after the 1997 publication of this book) turned out to play important roles in defining the foreign policy of the G.W. Bush administration, particularly in respect to the war in Iraq.½