Search Results

An examination is made of the relationship between the US and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and its successor, the World Trade Organization, addressing the crucial question of the likelihood that the US will exit, or through its behaviour undermine, the multilateral trade organization in favour of regional or bilateral alternatives. It is concluded that the probability of a US‐inspired weakening of the WTO is low, although the incentives for protectionism in the US are strong and growing as a result of globalization and the changing international division of labour. The US domestic political system gives voice to such protectionist interests in international trade policy through a set of administrative and legal remedies that are reinforced by principles such as reciprocity and ‘fair trade’. Countervailing factors to this situation include the growing power of US export interests, the effectiveness of the Executive in deflecting the protectionist tendencies in the US Congress, and the exceptional power and influence of the US over the multilateral regime, in which it is a rule maker rather than a rule taker, enjoying the power to bend the rules selectively to serve its interests. As such, the WTO tends to reflect and reinforce US economic interests, and the US is, therefore, likely to continue in overall terms its efforts to comply with and generally strengthen the multilateral organization, rather than to break away from it.

Examines the role of the US in international financial institutions with particular reference to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Describes the extraordinary influence of the US on these institutions as a function of both formal means (e.g., US financial contributions) and informal practices and conventions that have developed over time, with the informal mechanisms of influence often being more important than the formal ones. However, it is also argued that, notwithstanding the weight of US influence, it would be inaccurate to consider the World Bank and the IMF as mere instruments of US power and policy, and that their remaining credibility and legitimacy rest in part on their ability to create some political distance between themselves and their most powerful state patron. US domestic political conditions are also important. Within the country, the division of authority between Executive and Congress sometimes enhances and at other times constrains US influence; the effective exercise of US power also requires interlocutors in host governments who share the technical mind‐set and ideological predispositions of the US and international financial institutions. The different sections of the chapter: analyse the formal and informal structures of power in the World Bank and IMF; look at the US in relation to the financing, lending decisions, staffing and management of these institutions; and discuss formal power structures and informal exercises of influence.

An examination is made of the evolution of US behaviour in the United Nations Security Council since the 1990s; this behaviour shows an inconsistency born out of a general suspicion of the organization, particularly of its General Assembly, and the author demonstrates that US historical experience of the UN largely explains that suspicion. First provides some evidence of this US inconsistency of behaviour, with reference both to conflict resolution and humanitarian issues. Then goes on to explain the primary influences on this behaviour, arguing that US ambivalence towards the UN has been more affected by struggles over a New International Economic Order in the 1970s and US perceptions of unbalanced UN approaches to the Arab–Israeli dispute than by the end of the cold war. Having made special reference to America's chequered historical experience of the UN, the chapter examines the ways in which negative perceptions of the UN have played out in US domestic politics, particularly since the late 1990s. Finally, America's experience of the UN's expanded post‐cold‐war security agenda is reviewed, noting that the inherent tensions between the promotion of values and the promotion of interests, and the difficulties of relating means to ends, have come sharply to the fore during this period.

This chapter analyses the attempts of the Bush Administration in the United States (2001-2009) to dismantle the New Source Review (NSR), a programme to control air pollution from large and stationary sources. After a short introduction to US environmental politics, it first identifies potential drivers affecting decision makers' perceptions of dismantling costs and benefits. Attention is paid to motivational factors (i.e. economic considerations and ideology) as well as the institutional setting of environmental policy. After formulating tentative expectations regarding actors' behaviour, it describes and analyses the Bush Administration's dismantling attempts and strategies. By considering motivations, constraints, effects, and outputs it reveals how the dismantling of the NSR ultimately failed. This case study demonstrates the need to disentangle unintended and intended effects of dismantling attempts in order to identify the underlying dismantling strategies; it also suggests the need for a closer analysis of the circumstances under which institutional aspects influence actors' choice of dismantling strategies.

This chapter considers a second major structural feature of the American system potentially affected by transatlantic regulatory cooperation: the separation of powers. It focuses on the central role that the US President has historically played in advancing forms of international cooperation via the use of executive agreements, i.e. international compacts signed by the President without the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate, as is constitutionally required for treaties. Nearly all trade-related agreements entered into by the United States in fact take the form of executive agreements. This chapter questions the ‘discourse of executive expediency’ that has been used to justify deviation from constitutionally mandated treaty procedures, and concludes that executive agreements, in light of serious questions as to their legal effect, are in fact a poor instrument for implementing regulatory cooperation.

This chapter argues that the 2016 election in the United States is best understood in terms of the long-run consequences of the neoliberal turn in the 1970s, and the way in which the financial crisis of the late 2000s was addressed. In 2016 the electorate of the United States delivered probably the biggest political shock in their modern history, electing the unlikely figure of Donald Trump to the presidency. Trump’s rise is deeply intertwined with the financial crisis and with the longer-term political shifts resulting from the market liberal turn of the 1980s. If Trump is the most spectacular example of anti-system politics, the United States is the most extreme case of the subjection of society to the brute force of the market. The destabilization of US politics shows how an obsessive drive for marketization, high levels of income inequality, an unstable financial system, and constraints on political choice provoke political revolt.

This essay argues that the decision in Employment Division v. Smith has shaped the contemporary politics of religious freedom in the United States. Sullivan describes the diversity of religious communities and organizations that came together in opposition to the Smith decision, which was widely perceived as a threat to religion. Post-Smith, a new accommodation between the religion clauses of the First Amendment favors the rights of religions communities over those of individuals.

This introductory chapter presents new understandings of manufacturing's main lobbyist and trade association, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). To understand how a conservative, anti-union organization can also be seen as progressive, the chapter first takes a look at its background as it considers how disorganized and chaotic US capitalism was at the end of the nineteenth century, when NAM was founded. In addition to examining NAM's role in organizing and globalizing capitalism, the chapter explores how it worked, who it represented, and how effective it was as a lobbyist. It also identifies NAM's many internal tensions. Furthermore, the chapter identifies the economic, ideological, and institutional concerns that drove NAM actors, as these offer insight into the evolving political taxonomies of our own day.

This chapter studies how Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton, and Sheryl Sandberg fared as women public intellectuals in the context of contemporary political and corporate life. Elizabeth Warren used her economic stance as a major part of her focus on her Senate campaign and she has also been influential in her contribution to debates on affordable health-care and college debt. Warren's reputation has been built on her role as a ‘progressive fighter’ and comes from her track record of opposition to Donald Trump, which goes back to before his presidency. Meanwhile, Sheryl Sandberg is a bestselling author and her books and the controversy surrounding them have framed her contribution and legacy. Unlike other women public intellectuals with distinct academic careers and hugely successful publications, Sandberg does not write as an academic, but as a corporate thinker who is interested in the advancement of women in corporate life. Finally, Hillary Clinton is probably the most famous woman public intellectual on the planet. She has come closest to breaking the ‘glass ceiling’ in US politics and has provided signposts for women, both positive and negative, about what it means to be a woman at the highest levels of the public sphere.

The founding fathers of the American Republic intentionally looked to Ancient Rome rather than to Ancient Greece as a guide for their shining new cities on the hill. More recently, screeds lamenting the downfall of America—politically, socially, morally, culturally—have once again used Ancient Rome to show that those who do not understand history are condemned to repeat it. Films since the Second World War have forged a similar link, reading events surrounding the fall of Rome against contemporary events in American history. This chapter looks at three pairs of films to show how they do so: Douglas Sirk’s Sign of the Pagan (1954) and Pietro Francisci’s Attila (also 1954); Anthony Mann’s Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) and Ridley Scott’s Gladiator (2000); and Neil Marshall’s Centurion (2010) and Kevin Macdonald’s The Eagle (2011). Collectively, these films reflect key moments in post-war American history such as the Red Scare and McCarthyism, the war in Vietnam, the triumph of Reaganism, and the rise of the Tea Party, and further fuel debates that continue to link the fortunes of contemporary America with those of its ancient ancestor on the banks of the Tiber.

The final chapter revisits the chapters in this volume, identifying elements in each chapter that illumine one of three conclusions. The chapters illustrate, first, that religion has long been an active force in American politics, and the more one looks for religion in the political events of the past, the more religion one finds. They show, second, that practices derived from religious contexts may have affected American political life as much or more profoundly than any theological belief. Third and finally, the chapters show that the meanings attached to “religion” and “politics” have changed over time, and that religion and politics are socially constructed categories with definitions that shift from one historical moment to the next.

Chapter 5 presents evidence from quantitative and qualitative data to argue that higher level of South Asian engagements with the issues concerning home countries do not lead to depressed political participation in U.S. politics and demonstrates the linkages between the two spheres of political engagements.

This chapter closes the study with an overview of the implications of the Latin American experience for the comparative study of gay rights politics. The chapter begins with a discussion of how “decentering” gay politics contributes to our understanding of the global spread of gay rights. It continues with a discussion of the need to go beyond the “resource mobilization” paradigm for understanding what makes for a successful gay rights movement. Of particular significance is the ability of gay activists to craft campaigns that resonate with society and the culture at large. This discussion also contrasts gay politics in the United States and in Latin America, especially around the issue of same-sex marriage, to understand why gay rights appear to have had an easier time emerging in Latin countries. The chapter concludes with a broad discussion of what the advent of gay rights means for Latin American democracy.

This final chapter shows us how a strong female lead might resist monstrosity in the pursuit of political power. As an abused, divorced, Mexican-American woman, Arcadia Alvarado, is solidly situated in the margins of the fictional US society depicted in Saucer Country. Despite being marked as monstrous because of her race and gender, Alvarado finds her strength in resisting the monstrous political norms that dominate her U.S. context, rather than embracing them. I In this science-fictional world (which reveals the real intersectional failings of the American political world), Alvarado transgresses her assigned role as marginalized “other” by powerfully performing as a political leader without becoming a monster.

This chapter introduces The Tom Joyner Morning Show and describes its origin, format, audience, music, progressive politics, wit, growth, and longevity. I lay out my discovery of the show, my increasing fandom, and the unintentionally lengthy research period that ensued. I also lay out the meanings of the public sphere and counterpublics, and identify The Tom Joyner Morning Show as constituting a black working-class counterpublic. I consider the issues of celebrity culture, generational divides, neoliberal shift, and the recession of 2008. I document the show’s neglect in the larger public sphere and speculate on the reasons, including “saints or sinners” framings and high-tech snobbery.