² Macmillan, New York, 1931 (3d ed.).

³ Michels is answered by name. The authors of the government teaching books of the '20s and '30s were apparently not unaware of sociology, of political analysis or of anti-democratic writings.

⁴ Century, New York, 1928.

⁵ The following example might, of course, have been taken from almost any more recent book: “Viewed comprehensively, the president's powers and functions fall into two main groups [executive or legislative] …. Executive powers fall, in turn, into five categories …. These several forms of presidential executive activity will be described briefly in the order indicated.” (p. 236) And they are, for the remainder of the treatment on the presidency.

⁶ Macmillan, New York (7th ed.).

⁷ “ … the Federal Government has restored an old idea … that American society is a collectivity of interests—agriculture, industry, banking and labor—not a mere aggregation of abstract individuals each struggling for his own interest.” (p. 326).

⁸ Essentials of American Government (Appleton-Century, New York, 4th ed.)Google Scholar. This is a condensation of the Seventh Edition of their Introduction to American Government.

⁹ Irish, M. D. and Prothro, J., Politics of American Democracy (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1962), p. 507Google Scholar.

¹⁰ It is beyond the scope of this paper to argue the case that these two imperatives also help explain the continuing fission of theory and research in political scholarship as well as teaching.

¹¹ Binkley, Wilfred E. and Moos, Malcolm C., A Grammar of American Politics—The National Government (Knopf, New York, 1950)Google Scholar.

¹² Burns, James MacGregor and Peltason, Jack W., Government by the People (4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1960)Google Scholar.

¹³ It is possible that authors of teaching books do their worst on subjects for which they are recognized scholars. For another example, Eliot, T. H., Governing America: The Politics of a Free People (Dodd-Mead, New York, 1961)Google Scholar, who had served in Congress prior to writing his text, is still more authoritative and more out of date than any of the recent authors. Eliot cites nothing from the literature later than 1947.

¹⁴ Holt, New York, 1963 (4th ed.).

¹⁵ Only one statement is needed to keep these materials within the original social-psychological frame of reference and thus to hold them at the margins of politics: “Finding answers to such questions as how and why people vote the way they do is part of an approach to the study of government known as ‘political behavior.’” (p. 257, the opening sentence of the chapter.)

¹⁶ Young, William H., Ogg and Ray's Essentials of American National Government (Appleton, New York, 1963)Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Op. cit.

¹⁸ Lipset, Seymour M. et al. , “The Psychology of Voting: An Analysis of Political Behavior,” in Lindzey, Gardner, ed., Handbook of Social Psychology (Addison-Wesley, Cambridge, 1954), Vol. IIGoogle Scholar.

¹⁹ See my “Toward Functionalism in Political Science: The Case of Innovation in Party Systems,” this Review, September, 1963, and also the citations therein.

²⁰ Macmillan, New York, 1953.