Culture versus Economics: An American Dilemma

Abstract

“There are billions of potential conflicts in any modern society, but only a few become significant,” E. E. Schattschneider (1960: 66) pointed out many years ago. Accordingly, the most important political struggles are not issue conflicts but issue-cleavage conflicts, “arguments about what the argument is about” (ibid.: 70–71). The definition of alternatives, from a Schattschneiderian perspective, is the primal act of politics. If the sine qua non of a political party is the selection of leaders, then the quintessential act of a political system is the selection and framing of issues, which is to say, “the domination and subordination of conflicts” (ibid.: 66).

Consensus and Conflict: A Content Analysis of American Party Platforms, 1840–1896

“…The Whig/Republicans, in contrast, adopted more positive government, prostatist positions. Policies endorsing a protective tariff, national bank, publicly funded internal improvements, and public promotion of morality, such as sumptuary laws, constituted a great deal of the Whig program (Aldrich 2011; Foner 1995; Gerring 1999; Gienapp 1987; Holt 1999b; Howe 1979; Watson 2006).…”

“…The chance that the platforms of the major parties are more divergent on economic issues may offer insight into elite strategy over which issues the parties deemed the most appropriate and necessary to articulate the clearest policy alternatives, as well as the issues on which they deemed the most preferable to forge a cross-sectional national coalition. Economic issues may be better suited to appeal to a more heterogeneous population, rather than cultural issues, or state and local concerns, which speak to more regional or localized interests (Gerring 1999; Ware 2006).…”

“…It had traditionally been considered that economic-class affiliations influenced voter support for a particular party (Beard 1957), but further analysis revealed that voter ethnicity and culture may have been a more influential determinant of party allegiance (Benson 1961;Jensen 1971;Kleppner 1970). While the broader ideological concerns manifested in issues such as economics and states' rights may have been the cause for antagonisms among political elites, issues that reflected the ethnocultural and ethnoreligious backgrounds of the voting public tended to contribute toward interparty divisions, complicating the crafting of a broad electoral coalition (Gerring 1999). Generally, the Democrats' approach to religious and cultural matters, whereby they advocated a strict separation of the private and public spheres, contributed to their increased attraction to Catholic immigrants.…”

“…The Whig/Republican Yankee Protestant foundation resulted in the merging of the public and private spheres. This outlook manifested in policies that tended to regulate morality, such as sumptuary laws (Gerring 1998;Holt 1999b;Howe 1979). Studies highlighting regional variation, however, have questioned the rigidity of these alignments (Benson 1961;Formisano 1994;Kleppner 1979;McCormick, R. L. 1974;Silbey 1991).…”

“…Studies highlighting regional variation, however, have questioned the rigidity of these alignments (Benson 1961;Formisano 1994;Kleppner 1979;McCormick, R. L. 1974;Silbey 1991). Further studies have demonstrated the prominence of economic concerns as a driving force in the partisan debate of the time (Bensel 2000;Gerring 1999;John 2004).…”