In Support of "Single-Issue" Politics
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4286266 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sylvia Tesh, Sylvia N Tesh (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1984 |
| Volume | 99 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 27-44 |
| Publication date | 1984-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Political Science Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0032-3195 • E-ISSN: 1538-165X |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2150257 |
| OpenAlex | W2331404950 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
First the popular press took up the theme and more recently the academic press has echoed it: the rise of single-issue politics threatens the American political system. It is said that citizen groups organizing in ever greater numbers to push single issues ruin the careers of otherwise fine politicians who disagree with them on one emotional issue, paralyze the traditional process of governmental compromise, and ignore the common good in their selfish insistence on getting their own way. These charges are directed at organizations on both ends of the political spectrum -not only by people who claim to stand in some politically neutral spot but also at times by the very groups that take public stands for and against issues. Having a passionate conviction about abortion, disarmament, homosexuality, guns, feminism, tax laws, or the environment is increasingly described as a political problem itself. This article questions that position. It argues that the familiar charges against single-issue politics are false. In addition, it suggests that the charges conceal fundamental political debates about the appropriate role of citizens in representative government. First, the issues around which people organize are multiple, not single, and therefore it is unlikely that their advancement will ruin the careers of otherwise acceptable politicians. Behind the charge of narrowness lies an enduring political question about the very legitimacy of citizens organizing over issues, instead of over the distribution of power. Second, contrary to surface appearances, compromise is a constant feature of issue politics, taking place both among members of issue groups, and at all levels of governmental decisionmaking. The latent question concerns who makes those compromises and who should make them. Third, issue groups possess a deep concern for the public good and, far from being selfish, they hold to a view of public decision-making
Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Law · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Public Administration
| Unique citing works | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,19 |
| Citation span | 1989 - 2023 (35) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 7 |