Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T00:24:29.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Return to the State

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Gabriel A. Almond
Gabriel A. Almond*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three important questions are raised by the “return to the state” movement of recent years. First, are the pluralist, structural functionalist, and Marxist literatures of political science societally reductionist, as this movement contends? Second, does the neostatist paradigm remedy these defects and provide a superior analytical model? Third, regardless of the substantive merits of these arguments, are there heuristic benefits flowing from this critique of the literature? Examination of the evidence leads to a rejection of the first two criticisms. The answer to the third question is more complex. There is merit to the argument that administrative and institutional history has been neglected in the political science of the last decades. This is hardly a “paradigmatic shift”; and it has been purchased at the exorbitant price of encouraging a generation of graduate students to reject their professional history and to engage in vague conceptualization.

Type
Symposium
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 82 , Issue 3 , September 1988 , pp. 853 - 874
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1988 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Almond, Gabriel A., and Coleman, James S.. 1960. The Politics of the Developing Areas. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, William, and Weidner, Edward. 1953. American Government. 4th ed. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Armstrong, John A. 1973. The European Administrative Elite. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barker, Ernest. 1930. Church, State, and Study: Essays by Ernest Barker. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Bauer, Raymond, Pool, Ithiel, and Dexter, Lewis. 1963. American Business and Public Policy. New York: Atherton.Google Scholar
Beer, Samuel, and Ulam, Adam. 1964. Comparative Government. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Bentley, Arthur F. 1908. The Process of Government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bentley, Arthur F. 1967. The Process of Government. Ed. by Peter Odegard. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Burns, James M., and Peltason, J. W.. 1963. Government by the People. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Carnoy, Martin. 1984. The State and Political Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Carter, Gwendolyn, and Herz, John. 1972. Government and Politics in the Twentieth Century. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Coker, Francis. 1934. Pluralism. Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cooper, Joseph, and Brady, David. 1951. Toward a Diachronie Analysis of Change. American Political Science Review 75:998–1006.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1961. Who Governs? New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dodd, Lawrence. 1986a. The Cycles of Legislative Change: Building a Dynamic Theory. In Political Science, ed. Weissberg, Herbert. New York: Agathon.Google Scholar
Dodd, Lawrence. 1986b. A Theory of Legislative Cycles. In Congress and Policy Change, ed. Wright, Gerald, Riesselbach, Leroy, and Dodd, Lawrence. New York: Agathon.Google Scholar
Duguit, Leon. 1919. Law in the Modern State. Trans. Laski, H. J.. New York: Huebsch.Google Scholar
Durkheim, Emile. 1950. Les Regles de la methode sociologique. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1981. The Political System Besieged by the State. Political Theory 9:303–25.Google Scholar
Eckstein, Harry. 1960. Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British Medical Association. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ehrmann, Henry. 1957. Organized Business in France. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ehrmann, Henry. 1963. Bureaucracy and Interest Groups in Fifth Republic France. In Faktoren der Politischen Entscheidung, ed. Fraenkel, Ernst. Berlin: Gruyter.Google Scholar
Evans, Peter, Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, Theda, eds. 1985. Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Figgis, John Neville. 1914. Churches in the Modem State. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Garson, G. David. 1974. On the Origins of Interest-Group Theory: A Critique of a Process. American Political Science Review 68:1505–19.Google Scholar
Garson, G. David. 1978. Group Theories of Politics. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Gierke, Otto. 1900. Political Theory of the Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Golembiewski, Robert J. 1960. The Group Basis of Politics: Notes on Analysis and Development. American Political Science Review 54:962–71.Google Scholar
Herring, Edward Pendleton. 1936. Public Administration and the Public Interest. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Kariel, Henry. 1968. Pluralism. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Key, Valdimir O. Jr. 1952. Politics, Parties, and Pressure Groups. New York: Crowell.Google Scholar
Krasner, Stephen. 1984. Approaches to the State: Alternative Conceptions and Historical Dynamics. Comparative Politics 16:223–46.Google Scholar
La Palombara, Joseph. 1963. Bureaucracy and Political Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
La Palombara, Joseph. 1964. Interest Groups in Italian Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold. 1917. Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold. 1919. Authority in the Modem State. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Latham, Earl. 1952. The Group Basis of Politics: Notes for a Theory. American Political Science Review 46:376–97.Google Scholar
Lindsay, Alexander D. 1929. The Essentials of Democracy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Schneider, William. 1973. Political Sociology. In Sociology: An Introduction, ed. Smelser, Neil. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Lowi, Theodore. 1964. American Business, Public Policy, Case-Studies, and Political Theory. World Politics 16:677–715.Google Scholar
Lowi, Theodore J. 1969. The End of Liberalism: Ideology, Policy, and the Crisis of Public Authority. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
McFarland, Andrew. 1987. Interest Groups and Theories of Power in America. British Journal of Political Science 17:129–47.Google Scholar
Nettl, J. P. 1968. The State As Conceptual Variable. World Politics 20:559–92.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, Eric. 1981. On the Autonomy of the Democratic State. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, Eric. 1987. Taking the State Seriously. In Understanding Political Development, ed. Weiner, Myron and Huntington, Samuel. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Ogg, Frederick, and Orman Ray, P.. 1959. Essentials of American Government. 8th ed. Ed. Young, William. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Polsby, Nelson W. 1968. The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives. American Political Science Review 62:144–68.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert. 1973. The Political Attitudes of Senior Civil Servants in Western Europe. British Journal of Political Science 3:257–97.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert. 1976. The Comparative Study of Political Elites. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Ranney, Austin. 1966. The Governing of Men. New York: Holt & Rinehart.Google Scholar
Sabine, George. 1934. The State. Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, Elmer. 1942. Party Government. New York: Farrar & Rinehart.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda. 1982. Bringing the State Back In. Items, vol. 36. New York: Social Science Research Council.Google Scholar
Skowronek, Stephen. 1984. Building a New American State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred. 1978. State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Suleiman, Ezra. 1978. Elites in French Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Truman, David. 1951. The Governmental Process. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Truman, David. 1968. Political Group Analysis. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Watkins, Frederick. 1968. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
White, Leonard D. 1933. Trends in Public Administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
White, Leonard D. 1951. The Jeffersonians. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
White, Leonard D. 1954. The Jacksonians. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
White, Leonard D. 1956. The Federalists. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
White, Leonard D. 1958. The Republicans, 1869–1901. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wilson, James Q., ed. 1980. The Politics of Regulation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.