Daniel Elazar, Bogus or Brilliant: A Study of Political Culture Across the American States :: Politics Political Science Essays

Daniel Elazar, Bogus or Brilliant: A Study of Political Culture Across the American States American states each have individual political cultures which are important to our understanding of their political environments, behavior, and responses to particular issues. While voters probably do not consciously think about political culture and conform to that culture on election day, they seem to form cohesive clusters in different areas of the state, creating similar group political ideologies. Because of these similarities, it is possible to measure the dominant political culture within states or areas of a state, gaining insight into the mind-set of state residents. Whatever the state culture, whether liberal or conservative, participatory or exclusive, political culture identifies dominant, state-wide trends. The question remains whether there is an accurate way to measure this political culture phenomenon in the United States. Many studies try to measure political culture within states, but some political scientists are wary of assigning state political cultures because such measurements may be of dubious empirical grounding. While the process may not be entirely empirically sound, different state political cultures seem to exist and demand further analysis. In 1966, Daniel Elazar published his now famous assessment of United States’ political cultures. His evaluation of state cultures has been the focus of much study and criticism over the past three decades. Elazar proposes that the political culture in the United States developed in different regions due to east to west migratory patterns moving across the continent. Patterns of political culture were established during the Western frontier migration, as individuals followed â€Å"lines of least resistance which generally led them due west from the immediately previous area of settlement† (Elazar, 1966: 99). As a result, like-minded indivi duals migrated together and stayed together, causing similar political ideology to transform into a dominant political culture (Elazar, 1994). Political cultures are dominant in certain areas of the country due to westward expansion. Moralism characterizes communitarian-agrarian New England and the far northern states, while the agrarianism of the middle states is individualistic. Traditionalism dominates the South and its plantation agrarianism structure. Typically, moralistic political cultures focus on agrarianism, individualism on commerce, and traditionalism on aristocratic legitimacy. These differing foci help to categorize Elazar’s political cultures in the United States (Elazar 1984: 119, 122). Elazar’s political culture typology divides state political culture into three dominant categories: moralist, individualist, and traditionalist. Moralists measure government by its commitment to the public good and concern for public welfare.