| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
193688
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Why was the route to democracy in Scandinavia extraordinarily stable? This paper answers this question by studying Scandinavia’s eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century peaceful agrarian reforms, which contributed to auspicious state–society relations that made democracy progress relatively smoothly. Based on comparisons with contemporary France and Prussia and process-tracing evidence, the paper shows that Scandinavia achieved relatively extensive and peaceful agrarian reforms because of relatively high levels of meritocratic recruitment to the central administration and state control over local administration, which ensured impartial policymaking and implementation. These findings challenge prevailing theories of democratization, demonstrating that the Scandinavian countries represent an alternative, amicable path to democracy led by civil servants who attempt to transform their country socioeconomically. Thus, strong state-cum-weak society countries likely have better odds of achieving stable democracy than weak state-cum-weak society countries. However, building bureaucratic state administrations alongside autonomous political societies is probably a safer road to democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
048636
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Washington, D C, Federation of American Scientists, 1996.
|
| Description |
iv, 112p.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 040988 | 355.82008/KLA 040988 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
090248
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Debates over whether to require voters to provide proof of identity at the polls, and just how that can be accomplished, are taking place in legislative chambers and courtrooms across the nation. At the heart of these debates is the balancing act of ballot security versus access to voting. Opponents of voter-identification requirements argue that they place a disproportionate burden on ethnic and racial minorities, the poor, the less educated, the very young, and the very old. Supporters of identification requirements argue the standards are no higher than those required for boarding a plane or cashing a check, and the requirements are needed to prevent voter fraud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|