Political scientists have a familiar refrain that citizen's need to engage forcefully in the extensive debate on policy and politics. The reasons for the catchphrase is that political scientists get obsessed with arcane, technical issues and problems. Besides, political consultants and self-proclaimed experts have cozied up to authorities and news media and made empty promises to them. Similarly, news providers have encountered with experts who work better than political scientists at countering to their needs. However, some political scientists have emerged to be media darlings. Unequal democracy by Larry Bartels’ is the type of text which is thoughtful, analytically rich and provocative. Larry judiciously applied statistical models that complement the story thus capturing the reader’s attention. The text Unequal Democracy
is among the best community science books that provide searching and in-depth analysis of the radical causes and impacts of income discrepancies in America and offers a sobering evaluation of the propensity of the political system in America to live up the ideals of Democrats (Bartels 15). The research work is a presentation of the text review, which covers the central theses of the book and, the strengths and limitations of the text.
Theses of the Text: Unequal Democracy
The central hypothesis of the text debunks many mythologies on politics in modern America by exposing the broadening gap between the poor and the rich to shed some light on the status of the American democracy. Mainly, the author asserts that the gap separating the rich and the poor has widened up under the administration of Republicans and has slowed significantly under the Democrats, thus making America grossly unequal. The author alludes that the widening gap is not merely as a consequence of economic forces, but instead is a product of extensive policy choices within the political system that the partisan ideologies dominate together with the interests of the affluent class. Besides, the author provides a sobering account of the constraints to the revolution that partisan ideologies pose and the political authority inherent within the wealthy. The author also evaluates on the tax policy, Partisan variations in economic status, strive to upgrade the basic wage and, inequalities in political representations.
Strengths of the Author’s Argument
The first strength of the text is the case studies offered by the author in chapters six and eight as supportive evidence of the argument. For instance, the author expounds on the minimum wage, Bush tax cuts, and campaign to re-evaluate the estate tax and then provides an extensive analysis of politics and policy formulation (Bartels 127). Thus, the chapters are among the best articulation and interpretation of Bartels's argument that people can be ignorant or misinformed in a way that makes them back up policies that add no value to their attitudes and interests. Besides, the author spends enough space in expounding immediate policies for instance that on tax cuts. The persistent insertion of the analysis leads to skepticism which should be used as evidence to the provocative aspect of the text.
The other strength of the text is the author's exclusive reliance on the actual rate of income growth as a measure of economic status (Bartels 43). The test is appropriate due to the author's objective of portraying the financial discrepancies. One of the consequences of the measure is the outcome that Americans do not bother with the fact that some citizens live in vilest poverty while others have much so more wealth than their needs. The author is also fair in discussing the average revenue, income mobility, GDP and unemployment rates, which are constant with thesis (Bartels 91). Within chapter five of the text, the author provides an elaborate analysis of how American care for discrepancies. The author avails mixed evidence where awareness and ideologies condition the attitude. The author's discussion within chapter five is critical because of the assertion that citizens back policies they should not due to their ignorance. For instance, on inequality and taxes, the author recommends that signals from conventional leaders are misinformed, and incubates opinion that disagrees with attitudes towards inequality.
Limitation of the Author’s Argument
The first limitation of the author’s argument is that Bartels repudiates with the idea that the grounds of economic discrepancies in modern America have a negligent tie with the government (Bartel 30). The assertion raises the controversy over the responsibility of the government for the economy. Centrally, governments are the main actors in determining the level of the American economy. For instance, the majority of the policies and rules have aspects of economic impact. Besides, policies on the economy require some coordination between the Congress, courts, states and federal agencies and departments. Besides, governments have different aggressiveness in garnering and fashioning support for their policies. Also, the impact of presidents on economy varies in intensity and may have implications for the subsequent term taken over by another government. Thus, the claim that governments don't impact on the economy is refutable, thus tainting the arguments of the author.
The other limitation of the author's argument is that economic growth rates have been higher under Democratic than Republican administrations. The author applies a financial metric to evaluate annual growth rates in the actual per capita gross national product (Bartels 48). Through comparison of federal economic records under Republican and Democratic rules ranging from the year 1948 to the year 2005, the author concludes that unemployment rates were lowering while rates of economic growth have been rising under the democratic administration (Bartels 46). The weakness of the argument is that between 1948 and year 2005, six Republican and five Democratic presidents ruled the United States for 25 years and 36 years respectively, implying that the period they spent in the white house has been different, and thus the discrepancies in economic contributions. Besides, the weakness of the argument is inherent since even though presidents contribute much to the quarterly economic differences, the ruling government is statistically significant in the level of economic development. Similarly, Bartels overrated employment rates in concluding that Democratic administration has lowered the unemployment rates, thus making the argument refutable.
Conclusion
The text Unequal Democracy is among the best social science books that provide in-depth analysis of political grounds of economic discrepancies in America and evaluates the performance of each ruling government; democratic and republican between years 1948 and 2005. The main arguments lie on the broadening gap between the rich and the weak American citizens, thus sheds some right on the state of the American democracy. Among the strengths of the argument, the author relies on actual data to evaluate economic growth rate between governments. Besides, the author discusses income mobility, GDP, average revenue and unemployment rates which are consistent with the main argument. One of the weaknesses of the author's case is the overstatement that the rates of unemployment have been lower under Democratic administrations.
Works Cited
Bartels, Larry M. Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new gilded age. Princeton University Press, 2016.
