Undergraduate

Is there a connection between the unprecedented presidential campaign of 2016, the dysfunctional government in Washington, D.C., and in the so called “culture wars” in America?  The sophisticated social science that has analyzed our election choices and identified our political differences has not been able to explain why the world’s most powerful and wealthy society is so deeply divided on so many issues, and in such personal and polemical ways.  Coupled with random mass killings, police involved shootings and the shooting of police, what is behind the violence in our society so different than in other first world democracies.  It may be that social science cannot answer that question on its own.  It may be that a theoretical analysis of our history and culture can offer insight and context that is beyond mere empirical analysis. 

The history of the American political founding generally follows a routine script.  The story goes that Americans fought for self-government from an overbearing political authority wielded by the British Crown and established individual freedom to pursue private prosperity and social emancipation.  Later, fear of the British Crown morphed into fear of any central political authority in general to the point where today Americans mistrust government.  In that script, African slavery and Native American dispossession are viewed as historical exceptions that still require a coherent explanation, but are unrelated to the issues at the core of contemporary American politics.

In this course, the revolution against traditional political authority embodied in Thomas Jefferson's and Thomas Paine's attacks on the British crown, the rise of slavery, and the conflict with Native America will be viewed as co-extensive and coherent elements of our past and our national cultural and social development.  In short, I will argue that America possesses a distinct cultural identity that has shaped our politics, policies, the shape of our national government, and remains at the core of our popular culture. 

I will place these historical elements in context with the theory of cultural trauma that resulted from the 3^rd Estate European poor displaced to North America between the 16^th and 19^th centuries.  I will connect that trauma to our national fear of political authority in America.  I will also suggest that this fear is what binds both the progressives who attack the National Security Administration to the conservatives who stand by gun rights. This cultural and social trauma becomes the catalyst of America’s cultural identity, and that cultural identity may be the basis of our existing political structure, the character of contemporary politics, and our approach to much of our public policy. 

 I will offer a cultural trope; the American Western, that contains all the aspects of a cultural identity built out of trauma and fear.  We will see its imprint in many cultural social and political artifacts.  I will speak to the significance of the “Western”, its frontier setting and its uber-masculine character.  Through this cultural lens, students will be offered a way of understanding contemporary American politics and public policy that was previously unknown to them. Using original materials from the antebellum, including biographies, history, literature, and commentary, as well as contemporary images from American popular culture [such as film clips, news, and documentaries], a connection between the past and present will be presented.  

The American Cultures requirement seeks comparisons and contrasts of at least three cultural entities in its format.  The requirement will be achieved through contrast and comparison of Native American, European American, and African American cultural identities in the ante and post bellum, and their interplay in the story of American political history.  This is a course in political theory that will give context to both culture and politics in America.  Your work will be presented in three separate papers (a 6-page take-home midterm, 12-page term paper, and a 6-page take-home final exam), and discussions of course materials in sections.  Attendance at both lectures and sections are elements of the course grade.  There will be a focus on writing skills and framing expository arguments, as well as discussion and participation in lecture, section and office hours.

Robust democracy requires participation by the people in political processes and decisions. And, presumably, a just democracy requires people to participate in ways that are just. What might that mean? Does just participation mean that everyone follows the same rules or does it require something more than that? Is it just casting a vote? Making your preferences heard before ballots are cast? Could just participation include more than just choosing among the options presented to you? Might it involve helping to set the agenda? Could participation require that you listen as well as speak or vote?  And who gets to participate? Everyone in the State? A select part of the population? Those who are most representative? Those affected by a particular issue, law, or policy? Do just discussion and decision making processes grant everyone the same opportunities for participation? Or are some allowed, maybe even encouraged, to participate more than others? What if our commitment to participation for all ends up excluding or marginalizing some? Are spaces and discourses of political participation ever neutral?  If not, what is to be done?

This course explores what just participation might entail through contemporary Western political theory. We will begin with liberal democratic theories of fairness and participation. Then we will use multicultural, feminist, queer and other theoretical critiques to consider political participation from the perspective of minority or subordinated groups. We will not search for definitive answers or hard-and-fast conclusions about what just participation is or should be. Rather, we are interested in getting a better sense of participation’s many possibilities and problems.  

Instructor: Paul Martorelli

This course will be an intensive, research‐based junior proseminar on the politics of Asians in the
United States. The topic of Asian American politics starts with two apparent paradoxes. First, the
term "Asian American" implies an underlying unity and coherence in the beliefs, behaviors, and
identities of the individuals to whom the term is applied. Yet there is a dizzying diversity of
ethnicities, religions, cultures, languages, and immigration histories embodied by these individuals
under the rubric of "Asian American." Second, one of the bedrock findings in political science is
that political engagement increases with high socioeconomic attainment, and Asian Americans as
a group have achieved vaunted levels of socioeconomic success. Yet by most measures of politics,
Asian Americans appear to be the least participatory racial/ethnic group in the American
electorate.

An exploration of these two paradoxes forms the keystone of this course. We will examine,
through selected readings and directed research, the role of interests, identities, institutions,
ideology, and immigrant context in shaping the political incorporation of Asian Americans. Is there
a "group‐ness" or shared political interests for Asian Americans? Are Asian Americans more like
African Americans today or like white ethnic immigrant‐based groups from the late 19th and early
20th centuries, politically? Does the "under‐participation" of Asians in politics reflect individual
preferences, informational gaps, and immigrant habits? Or do Asian Americans face
institutionalized, structural barriers to access and inclusion? What role do institutions like political
parties and civil society organizations play in the political incorporation of Asian Americans?
 

This one-unit course will feature a guest speaker each week discussing an issue currently in the news. The class is open to all students, and there are no prerequisites. The class is offered Pass/Not Pass, based on a final examination. May be repeated for credit.

This course does not count as an upper division Political Science requirement.

The Junior Seminars are intense writing seminars which focus on the research area of the faculty member teaching the course. The seminars provide an opportunity for students to have direct intellectual interactions with faculty members while also giving the students an understanding for faculty research. Junior seminars fulfill upper division requirements for the major.

We are currently experiencing a global expansion of judicial power. In stable democracies, transitional societies and even autocracies, courts have become central actors in national politics and policymaking. Today, major political controversies often end up in court and are decided by judges, rather than by elected legislators serving in national parliaments. How do we explain this tremendous growth of judicial power and courts newly expanded roles in politics and policymaking? And what are the consequences of this judicialization of politics and policymaking for majoritarian institutions and democratic practices? 

This course provides an introduction to the political science of law and courts. This is not a course on constitutional law, and the focus will not be on the development of legal doctrines or the reasoning of important cases. Instead, we will evaluate law and courts as political institutions and judges as political actors and policy-makers across different types of political systems. Topics will include: the foundations of judicial independence, the relationship between the courts and other branches of government (e.g., judicial oversight of the bureaucracy), the sources of judicial power, the rights revolution and the role of courts in democratic consolidation. Courts in the U.S., France, Egypt, Turkey and Taiwan will be examined.

The Junior Seminars are intense writing seminars which focus on the research area of the faculty member teaching the course. The seminars provide an opportunity for students to have direct intellectual interactions with faculty members while also giving the students an understanding for faculty research.

Junior seminars fulfill upper division requirements for the major.

Subfield:   Comparative Politics

Note: This description is from Spring 2015

Homelessness, global warming, corruption, bankrupt pension systems, educational inequality... This course explores what we can learn in general about the way societies try to address and solve difficult and seemingly intractable public problems. Can we attribute success or failure to institutions and their capacity to solve problems? Are problems difficult to solve because they are so complex and we lack know-how or because of a failure of political will? What are the characteristics of organizations or communities able to solve problems proactively or creatively? How do public problems get politically framed and how are they used to mobilize constituencies? The course draws on literature in public administration, public policy studies, and democratic theory to try to better understand some of the major social, political, environmental, and economic problems of our contemporary world.

Note: This description is from Spring 2014

This course provides an overview of California politics, with a focus on contemporary issues and an analysis of who wields power and why. Specifically, the course will focus on : the demographic, social and economic forces that shape the State's politics- the three official branches of state government (executive, legislative and judicial)- the three unofficial branches (the media, lobbyists and interest groups)- campaigns (candidates, initiatives, consultants, pollsters, political parties and money), local government, the state budget and education policies.

Subfield:   American Politics

Please note this description is from Fall 2013

This course examines public opinion in American Politics and how to measure it.  The course considers the nature of public opinion, survey methods, the role of polling in opinion expression, opinion formation, citizen knowledge, the role of media in shaping opinion, the effect of opinion on policy, and political polarization.

Course themes:

1. What is public opinion and in what ways is it expressed?

2. How do surveys perform as measures of public opinion and what is their role in our democracy? Are they accurate? What do they measure?

3. What are the implications of the changes in technology for surveys?

4. Are citizens knowledgeable? Are they rational or self-interested?

5. Is the public polarized?

6. How does the media influence public opinion?

7. What role does opinion play in shaping policy?

NOTE: This description is from Spring 2015