In the foundational document of modern public-opinion research, Philip E. Converse’s "The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics" (1964) established the U.S. public’s startling political ignorance. This volume makes Converse’s long out-of-print article available again and brings together a variety of scholars, including Converse himself, to reflect on Converse’s findings after nearly half a century of further research. Some chapters update findings on public ignorance. Others outline relevant research agendas not only in public-opinion and voter-behavior studies, but in American political development, "state theory," and normative theory. Three chapters grapple with whether voter ignorance is "rational." Several chapters consider the implications of Converse’s findings for the democratic ideal of a well-informed public; others focus on the political "elite," who are better informed but quite possibly more dogmatic than members of the general public. Contributors include Scott Althaus, Stephen Earl Bennett, Philip E. Converse, Samuel DeCanio, James S. Fishkin, Jeffrey Friedman, Doris A. Graber, Russell Hardin, Donald Kinder, Arthur Lupia, Samuel L. Popkin, Ilya Somin, and Gregory W. Wawro. This book was originally published as a special issue of Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society.

In the Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion (1992), John Zaller set out one of the most influential models of opinion formation: he presented the public as a pliable instrument of political elites, who are able to garner support simply by sending "cues" through the mass media telling Republicans or Democrats, for example, what "the" Republican or Democratic position is on a given issue. Contributors to this volume critically examine Zaller’s model and its implications, empirical and normative. The introduction contrasts two different strands in Zaller’s book, one of which confines the impact of media messages to politicians’ cues, the other of which emphasizes the impact of journalists’ interpretive frames. Other chapters examine whether elite domination of public opinion is desirable and assess how well Zaller’s model has withstood two decades of research. Zaller himself contributes a long retrospective in which he modifies some claims, defends others, and sets out a bold new research agenda. This book was published as a special issue of Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society.

Offers a new perspective on international law and international legal argumentation: to what event is international law a belief system?

Now, more than ever, people drive the democratic process. What people think of their government and its leaders, how (or whether) they vote, and what they do or say about a host of political issues greatly affect the further strengthening or erosion of democracy and democratic ideals. This fully updated new sixth edition of Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, by Russell J. Dalton, continues to offer the only truly comparative study of political attitudes and behavior in the United States, Great Britain, France, and Germany. In addition to its comprehensive, thematic examination of political values, political activity, voting, and public images of government within a cross-national context, Citizen Politics explores new forms of political activity, such as Internet-based activism and new forms of political consumerism. All chapters have been updated with the latest research and empirical evidence. Further, Dalton includes new discussions of citizen sophistication and its implications for democratic citizenship.

This book proposes a conceptualisation of nationalism with a multilevel operational character. It offers three different perspectives on nationalism that consider both the discursive structure and the discursive agency of nationalism. It also demonstrates a number of intra-phenomenal and extra-phenomenal constraints on nationalism. This book underlines that nationalism in contemporary Europe should not be regarded in terms of methodological homogeneity and conceptual uniformity, ideological rigidity or strategic consistency but rather as a contested, segmented, bounded and contextual phenomenon.