Politicians and political analysts continue to use a single liberal-conservative dimension to analyze the ideological views of the American people, but that approach is increasingly inadequate. Professors Maddox and Lilie have gone beyond the liberal-conservative continuum. By separating questions aof economic policy from issues involving civil liberties, they find four basic ideological group: liberals, conservatives, libertarians, and populists. This book goes a long way toward explaining such phenomena as ticket-splitting, the impact of the baby-boom generation, and the internal conflicts both major parties will face over the next few years.

Politicians and political analysts continue to use a single liberal-conservative dimension to analyze the ideological views of the American people, but that approach is increasingly inadequate. Professors Maddox and Lilie have gone beyond the liberal-conservative continuum. By separating questions aof economic policy from issues involving civil liberties, they find four basic ideological group: liberals, conservatives, libertarians, and populists. This book goes a long way toward explaining such phenomena as ticket-splitting, the impact of the baby-boom generation, and the internal conflicts both major parties will face over the next few years.

A guide to productive dialogue across ideological divides with practical tools for building trust, defusing hostility, and approaching hot-button topics. With the election of President Biden, many liberals thought that the world of political discourse would somehow go back to normal. But the continued extremism of Republican politicians and conservative pundits has only stoked the flames of progressive disdain in ways that make it harder than ever to engage in civil debate. In Beyond Contempt, Erica Etelson shows us how to communicate effectively across the political divide without soft-pedaling our beliefs—or playing into the hands of divisive politicians. Using Powerful Non-Defensive Communication skill sets, we can express ourselves in ways that inspire open-minded consideration instead of triggering defensive reactions. With detailed instruction and helpful examples, Etelson demonstrates how we can open hearts and minds in unexpected ways.

Originally published in 1984, this book proposes a structural theory of social attitudes, presents the empirical evidence for the theory, and defines and explores liberalism and conservatism and the justification for associating social attitudes with these terms. The core ideas are that the structure of social attitudes, those sets of beliefs about social "objects" or referents shared by many or most people of a society, is basically dualistic rather than bipolar, and that the referents of social attitudes are differentially criterial to individuals and groups of individuals. The common belief that social attitudes are polarized, with liberal beliefs at once end of a continuum and conservative beliefs at the other end, is questioned. Instead, liberalism and conservatism are conceived as separate and independent sets of beliefs. The book will elaborate and explain these statements and bring evidence to bear on the empirical validity.

Buried in many people and operating largely outside the realm of conscious thought are forces inclining us toward liberal or conservative political convictions. Our biology predisposes us to see and understand the world in different ways, not always reason and the careful consideration of facts. These predispositions are in turn responsible for a significant portion of the political and ideological conflict that marks human history. With verve and wit, renowned social scientists John Hibbing, Kevin Smith, and John Alford—pioneers in the field of biopolitics—present overwhelming evidence that people differ politically not just because they grew up in different cultures or were presented with different information. Despite the oft-heard longing for consensus, unity, and peace, the universal rift between conservatives and liberals endures because people have diverse psychological, physiological, and genetic traits. These biological differences influence much of what makes people who they are, including their orientations to politics. Political disputes typically spring from the assumption that those who do not agree with us are shallow, misguided, uninformed, and ignorant. Predisposed suggests instead that political opponents simply experience, process, and respond to the world differently. It follows, then, that the key to getting along politically is not the ability of one side to persuade the other side to see the error of its ways but rather the ability of each side to see that the other is different, not just politically, but physically. Predisposed will change the way you think about politics and partisan conflict. As a bonus, the book includes a "Left/Right 20 Questions" game to test whether your predispositions lean liberal or conservative.

How should one understand the nature and possibilities of political radicalism today? The political radical is normally thought of as someone who stands on the left, opposing backward-looking conservatism. In the present day, however, the left has turned defensive, while the right has become radical, advocating the free play of market forces no matter what obstacles of tradition or custom stand in their way. What explains such a curious twist of perspective? In answering this question Giddens develops a new framework for radical politics, drawing freely on what he calls "philosophic conservatism", but applying this outlook in the service of values normally associated with the Left. The ecological crisis is at the core of this analysis, but is understood by Giddens in an unconventional way - as a response to a world in which modernity has run up against its limits as a social and moral order. The end of nature, as an entity existing independently of human intervention, and the end of tradition, combined with the impact of globalization, are the forces which now have to be confronted, made use of and coped with. This book provides a powerful interpretation of the rise of fundamentalism, of democracy, the persistence of gender divisions and the question of a normative political theory of violence. It will be essential reading for anyone seeking a novel approach to the political challenges which we face at the turn of the twenty-first century.