- Hardcover: 208 pages
- Publisher: Yale University Press; 2nd edition (Feb 8 2002)
- Language: English
- ISBN-10: 0300092180
- ISBN-13: 978-0300092189
- Product Dimensions: 21.1 x 14.5 x 2.3 cm
- Shipping Weight: 386 g
- Average Customer Review: 3.6 out of 5 stars See all reviews (18 customer reviews)
- Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #1,635,638 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Product Details |
Product Description
From Publishers Weekly
In this slim, accessible volume, Yale political science professor emeritus Dahl (On Democracy) takes a critical look at our Constitution and why we continue to uphold it, though it is "a document produced more than two centuries ago by a group of fifty-five mortal men, actually signed by only thirty-nine, and adopted in only thirteen states." As an instrument for truly democratic government, Dahl argues, it fails. With insufficient models to guide them and a distrust of unfettered democracy, the Framers allowed several "undemocratic elements" in: slavery was accepted and suffrage effectively limited to white men. But Dahl saves his most potent criticism for two provisions that have remained unchanged: the electoral college and the Senate, both of which tie votes to geography rather than population, thereby skewing political power toward coalitions of smaller states whose interests may not necessarily coincide with the nation's as a whole. And as the 2000 presidential election illustrated, the electoral college can frustrate the will of the majority. Perhaps the most enlightening aspect of Dahl's critique is his comparison of our system with those of other stable democracies. In his view, countries with proportional representation which typically results in multi-party states and coalition governments offer a purer form of democratic equality, while our structure frequently supports, for example, policies beneficial to the most powerful lobbyists, rather than the greatest number of citizens. This book originated as a series of lectures at Yale and, as a result, the argument is abbreviated and clear. While Dahl concedes that he has occasionally oversimplified, his intention is not to write a political treatise but to encourage American citizens to change, if not the Constitution, then at least "the way we think about it" and at that, he should have success.
Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc.
Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc.
Review
"This book is vintage Dahl at the highest possible level. It is lucid, acutely analytic, literate, and both consistent with the long series of previous books by Dahl and new in its details and broad contours." -- Fred Greenstein, Princeton University
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most helpful customer reviews
3.0 out of 5 stars
Not Dahl's best,
By A Customer
This review is from: How Democratic Is the American Constitution?: Second Edition (Paperback)
Dahl is a fine scholar, as shown by his critiques, decades ago, of the leftist cliches of C. Wright Mills, and by his history of politics in the city of New Haven. There has been a falling off in the quality of his work in recent years, although sometimes the old fire is still there. In this book, I suspect, he is trying too hard to be accessible. One of his points in this book is that the judicial review of legislative actions has gone too far -- federal judges regularly usurp the proper province of elected officials. This view, of course, is shared by many on both the left and the right. Each side believes, naturally enough, that the courts that strike down its favorite statutes are tyrannically usurping power. In his discussions of judicial review, Dahl essentially alludes to issues that require careful consideration. His allusions just contribute to his display of populist values and pessimism about their implementation. They aren't analytically helpful.
3.0 out of 5 stars
Thought provoking, but certainly biased.,
By R.P. (central Illinois) - See all my reviews
This review is from: How Democratic Is the American Constitution?: Second Edition (Paperback)
This book was fascinating, but written from what I perceived to be a left wing bias. (Which is fine, freedom of thought is a cherished American belief.)Professor Dahl makes several good points. Personally, I think the Electoral College is long overdue for abolition, and I'm not hostile to the idea of abolishing the Senate and establishing a unicameral legislature. However, I'm not convinced the US should adopt proportional representation. (Although perhaps the first-past-the-post system could be modified. For example, a run off election if no candidate garners more than 50% of the vote.) Professor Dahl has little use for our Presidential system, but doesn't adequately explain to me why we should have both a President and Prime Minister. I liked this book. It is what it was intended to be....thought provoking. However I tend to disagree with some of his prescriptions.
1.0 out of 5 stars
This book is terrible! Stay away at all costs!,
By Brendan (Dallas, TX United States) - See all my reviews
This review is from: How Democratic Is the American Constitution? (Hardcover)
I admit this book has some decent points to make but overall his analysis comes across as disorganized, bitter, ill informed, and he seems like a man who would be happier living in a European democracy. He makes the point that the Declaration of Independence isn't democratic because it says "all men" instead of "all persons." However, one trip to a dictionary that gives the history of the usage of the word "man" will show that up until the 20th century, "man" was used to mean 'mankind' and not just male humans. I'm only a college student getting a degree in political science and it's sad that I'm able to disprove a Yale professor with knowledge I receieved in high school. He is critical of our system only because other democratic countries have different systems. He also manages to slip in his bitterness over the 2000 election of George Bush several times by hiding it under the moniker of "international embarrassment" over the electoral college. I'll admit that he does have a few positive points to make on the Founding Fathers on such issues as slavery but his general analysis and criticism is almost an anachronism. He expects the Framers of the Constitution to be able to make judgement on issues with the knowledge and insight that a person of the 21st Century has. His book is poorly written as well; often he makes a controversial claim only to say "I'll address this in a later chapter." I've not read any other books that Dahl has written but this book leaves a bad taste in my mouth for his style and belief system.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
Want to see more reviews on this item?
|
Most recent customer reviews |
Listmania!
Look for similar items by category
- Books > History > Americas > United States
- Books > History > United States
- Books > Law > Academic Materials
- Books > Law > Constitutional Law
- Books > Law > Current Affairs
- Books > Nonfiction > Politics > History & Theory
- Books > Nonfiction > Politics > United States
- Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > Government
- Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > Political Doctrines
- Books > Professional & Technical > Law > Constitutional Law
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
