The American People and American Government

Influence and the New American Revolution

Pitt Political Review ◽

10.5195/ppr.2015.59 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 39-44

Author(s):

Raghav Sharma

Keyword(s):

American Revolution ◽

The United States ◽

American People ◽

American Government ◽

Finance Reform ◽

Effect Change ◽

The People ◽

The Government ◽

And Control ◽

The Relationship

Contemporary political discourse in the United States is rife with ideas on how our society can change and reform — in particular, issues such as campaign finance reform, income inequality, and the use and control of firearms are in need of a comprehensive response that is attentive to the needs and will of the American people. Sadly, the relationship between the American people and our government is currently in a dismal state. This relationship between the people and the government has become unbalanced and unfair, reducing the likelihood of change and deterring individuals from believing in their ability to influence such reform. The need to understand our capacity to effect change, though, is absolutely necessary. The issues facing the American government at this time are as numerous as they are serious, but ideas and proposals are coming forward with the potential to rebalance this relationship. More importantly, they have the potential to usher in a new American Revolution that makes good on the democratic promise of a government for, of and by the people.

Download Full-text

Pressure Groups

American Political Science Review ◽

10.2307/1949625 ◽

1942 ◽

Vol 36 (3) ◽

pp. 471-481 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Mary Earhart Dillon

Keyword(s):

Political Parties ◽

American People ◽

Pressure Group ◽

American Government ◽

Democratic Government ◽

Political Literature ◽

Pressure Groups ◽

The Republic ◽

The Many ◽

The Ideal

In recent political literature, pressure groups have frequently been condemned as a deleterious element in American government. One scholar in the field of political parties writes: “In the economy of democratic government the pressure group is definitely a parasite on the wastage of power exercised by the sovereign majority.” Another scholar uses the following harsh language: “There exist socially created constraints which emanate from less sanctioned or less responsible sources, informal and opportunistic in their operation; they fluctuate incessantly in intensity and direction. These constraints may be called social pressures…. In R. E. Park's comment: ‘The pressure group is not an army which seeks to win battles by frontal attacks on hostile positions; it is, rather, a body of sharp-shooters which pick off its enemies one by one.’” Another student of politics, in a denunciation of pressure groups, says: “It is a testimonial to the faith, the tenacity, or the credulity of the American people that after 150 years they still cling to the forms—without the substance—of democratic government. Since the founding of the Republic the democratic process has been perverted to a greater or less degree by cunning and powerful minorities bent on serving their own interests. The ideal of rule by the majority for the good of the many has been illusory from the start.”

Download Full-text

American Islamic Charities in an Age of Terrorism: The Holy Land Foundation as a Case Study

World Journal of Social Science Research ◽

10.22158/wjssr.v4n1p44 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 44

Author(s):

Lanouar Ben Hafsa

Keyword(s):

Civil Rights ◽

American People ◽

Constitutional Rights ◽

Holy Land ◽

American Government ◽

Law Enforcement Officials ◽

The Government ◽

Financing Of Terrorism ◽

To Come

The American government targeting of US-based Islamic charities came as response to the shock of the 9/11 attacks, especially its devastating effects on the self-esteem of the American people and their sense of national pride. Actually, they came as part of the “War on Terror”, a phrase used for the first time by President Bush in his famous September 20, 2001 speech.But cracking down on US-based Islamic relief groups meant, first and foremost, keeping them under a tight scrutiny in an attempt to thwart the financing of terrorism, after the government discovered that al-Qaeda and other militant groups had abused charities to fund attacks across the globe. This paper takes the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation as a case study, not only because it was the first of its kind to come under the spotlight of law enforcement officials, but also because it had been the largest Muslim charitable organization before it was shut by the Bush administration in December 2001. More importantly, it explores the controversy over civil rights, especially the unwavering contention opposing advocates of unrestricted governmental powers to preserve national security, to individual liberties champions, more concerned about the consequential erosion of such constitutional rights, and staunchly committed to defend them.

Download Full-text

The Third Home Rule Crisis, the First World War, and Partition

Two Irelands beyond the Sea ◽

10.3828/liverpool/9781786940452.003.0003 ◽

2018 ◽

pp. 44-86

Author(s):

Lindsey Flewelling

Keyword(s):

World War I ◽

The United States ◽

American People ◽

Home Rule ◽

World War ◽

American Government ◽

The Third ◽

Irish America ◽

The First World War

This chapter analyses the third Home Rule crisis at the beginning of the twentieth century, as Irish unionism evolved to focus on a distinctive Ulster identity separate from the rest of Ireland. Militancy was increasingly open, partially justified a violent image of Irish-America which the unionists themselves had created. Next, the chapter investigates the role of the United States in World War I-era Irish politics, which had the effect of increasing Ulster unionists’ sense that their loyalty to the British government had been betrayed. The unionist movement advanced during this period to become increasingly militant, focused in Ulster, and gradually accepting of partition. Unionists sought to discredit Irish-America and American government influence, and appeal to the American people to support their own movement.

Download Full-text

Winning the Peace: American Planning for a Profitable Post-War World

Journal of American Studies ◽

10.1017/s0021875801006557 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 35 (1) ◽

pp. 111-126 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

VICTOR J. VISER

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

American Association ◽

American People ◽

American Business ◽

Advertising Agencies ◽

World War ◽

American Government ◽

Advertising Industry ◽

Global Power ◽

Post War

Shortly after the end of World War II, on 11 December 1945, James Webb Young, Chairman of the Advertising Council and Director of the J. Walter Thompson Company, spoke to the annual meeting of the American Association of Advertising Agencies at the Continental Hotel in Chicago. The title of his speech was, “What Advertising Learned From the War,” and in it Young talked about an immediate post-war period that was, by most accounts, an exuberant time for an America flushed by a victory that finally marked it as a true global power. The American government proclaimed it, the American people believed it, and American business stood ready to sell it through an advertising industry that itself had come of age during, and because of, the war.

Download Full-text

Ideology and Public Policy: Antistatism in American Welfare State Transformation

Journal of Policy History ◽

10.1353/jph.2005.0007 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 17 (1) ◽

pp. 52-71 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Jill Quadagno ◽

Debra Street

Keyword(s):

Welfare State ◽

Political Theory ◽

Private Property ◽

Civil Disobedience ◽

The United States ◽

American People ◽

State Transformation ◽

American Government ◽

The Government ◽

Liberal Culture

Henry David Thoreau's influential essay “Civil Disobedience,” published in 1849, began with a ringing declaration of opposition to government: “I heartily accept the motto, ‘That government is best which governs least’; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe—‘That government is best which governs not at all.’…the character of the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way.” Thoreau's statement summarizes a central thesis in political theory, what has become a historical constant in the minds of researchers seeking to explain the development and parameters of the American welfare state. This thesis is that any power given to the government is subtracted from the liberty of the governed, a concept best captured by the term “antistatism.” Thus, Lipset contends that the United States is dominated by an encompassing liberal culture that honors private property, distrusts state authority, and holds individual rights sacred. Similarly, according to Huntington, Americans live by a creed that views government as the most dangerous embodiment of power. For Morone, American government is a “polity suspicious of its own state.” Hartz, too, asserts that the master assumption is that “the power of the state must be limited.”

Download Full-text