No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Prime Minister as Symbol: A Rejoinder
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2009
Extract
From my perspective, two interesting questions arise from Stark's comment: first, a question concerning the usefulness or explanatory power of Lijphart's élite accommodation theory; and second, a question about the changing nature of infra-élite relations (specifically those occurring within the federal cabinet system) as distinct from inter-élite relations, primarily at the governmental level in Canada. Bailey's model becomes relevant in the discussion of the second question.
- Type
- Notes
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 1973 , pp. 516 - 517
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1973
References
1 “Consociational Democracy”, World Politics, vol. XXI, January 1969, p. 216.
2 From private correspondence dated 29 August 1969; see also Lijphart, Arend, “Cultural Diversity and Theories of Integration,” this Journal, IV (March, 1971), 1–14.Google Scholar
3 Strategems and Spoils (Oxford, 1970), 83.
4 See my “Decisional Technology and Political Process in Canada,” forthcoming PH D dissertation, McGill University.
5 Crossman, Richard H.S., The Myths of Cabinet Government (Cambridge, Mass. 1972), 44.Google Scholar
6 Robertson, Gordon, “The Changing Role of the Privy Council Office,” Canadian Public Administration (Winter, 1971), 491–2.Google Scholar
7 Johnson, A.W., “The Treasury Board of Canada and the Machinery of Government of the 1970s,” this Journal, IV (Sept. 1971), 353.Google Scholar