Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Demokratie in der Krise? Zur Qualität der US-amerikanischen Demokratie

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbuch Politik USA

  • 437 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Beitrag analysiert die Ausgestaltung und Funktionsweise zentraler Elemente der US-amerikanischen Demokratie. Angesichts der aktuellen innen- und außenpolitischen Herausforderungen wird gefragt, ob und inwieweit die vielfältigen Krisenkonstellationen der jüngsten Vergangenheit die Qualität der Demokratie in den USA beeinträchtigt haben. Dabei wird aufgezeigt, wie sich unterschiedliche Krisenphänomene im Systemkontext der amerikanischen Politik und Gesellschaft niederschlagen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Die Verwendung von männlichen grammatikalischen Formen schließt immer auch weibliche Personen mit ein.

Literatur

  • ANES. 2008. Guide to Public Opinion and Electoral Behavior. http://www.electionstudies.org/nesguide/gd-index.htm. Zugegriffen am 04.09.2014.

  • APSA. 1950. Towards a More Responsible Two-Party System: A Report of the Committee on Political Parties. In American Political Science Review, Aufl. 44(3), part II supplement.

    Google Scholar 

  • APSA. 2004. American Democracy in an Age of Rising Inequality. Perspectives on Politics 2(4): 651–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal Democracy. The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartolini, Stefano. 1999. Collusion, Competition, and Democracy. Journal of Theoretical Politics 11(4):435–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartolini, Stefano. 2000. Collusion, Competition, and Democracy. Journal of Theoretical Politics 12(1):33–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, David. 2005. Freedom is the Foundation. In Assessing the Quality of Democracy, Hrsg. Larry Diamond und Leonardo Morlino, 32–46. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, Arthur. 1908. The Process of Government. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder, Sarah A., und Frances E. Lee. 2013. Making Deals in Congress. In Negotiating Agreement in Politics. APSA Report of the Task Force on Negotiating Agreement in Politics, Hrsg. Jane Mansbridge und Cathie Jo. Martin, 54–72. Washington, DC: APSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binder, Sarah A., und Forrest Maltzman. 2013. Advice and Consent: The Politics of Selecting Federal Judges. In Congress Reconsidered, 10th ed, Hrsg. Lawrence Dodd und Bruce Oppenheimer, 265–286. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchstein, Hubertus, und Dirk Jörke. 2011. Democracy, Theories of. In International Encyclopedia of Political Science, Hrsg. Bertrand Badie, Dirk Berg-Schlosser, und Leonardo Morlino, 572–583. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bühlmann, Marc, et al. 2012. Demokratiebarometer. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 6(1):115–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caiani, Manuela, Donatella della Porta, und Claudius Wagemann. 2012. Mobilizing on the Extreme Right. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cain, Bruce E., Patrick Egan, und Sergio Fabbrini. 2003. Towards More Open Democracies: The Expansion of Freedom of Information Laws. In Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies, Hrsg. Bruce E. Cain, Russell J. Dalton, und Susan E. Scarrow, 115–139. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, Raj et al. 2014. The Equality of Opportunity Project. http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Crouch, Colin und Wolfgang Streeck (Hrsg.). 1997. Political Economy of Modern Capitalism: Mapping Convergence and Diversity. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, Russell J. 2013. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Advanced Industrial Democracies, 6. Aufl. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, Larry, und Leonardo Morlino (Hrsg.). 2005. Assessing the Quality of Democracy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domhoff, William G. 2014. Who Rules America: The Triumph of the Corporate Rich. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunkelman, Marc. 2014. The Crisis of American Exceptionalism. In RealClearPolitics, 13. 08.2014, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/08/13/the_crisis_of_american_exceptionalism_123644.html. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Erdmann, Gero, und Marianne Kneuer (Hrsg.). 2011. Regression of Democracy? Wiesbaden: VS Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Election Commission. 2012. 2012 Presidential Popular Vote Summary, http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2012/2012pres.pdf. Zugegriffen am 04.09.2014.

  • Freedom House. 2014. Freedom in the World Report. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2014#.VAiNvmeKDL8. Zugegriffen am 01.05.2014.

  • Fukuyama, Francis. 2014. America in Decay. Foreign Affairs 93(5): 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallup. 2012. Atheists, Muslims See Most Bias as Presidential Candidates. Two-Thirds Would Vote for Gay or Lesbian. http://www.gallup.com/poll/155285/atheists-muslims-bias-presidential-candidates.aspx. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Gallup. 2013. Americans' Trust in Government Generally Down This Year. Fewer Say They Have Trust in Executive and Judicial Branches, September 2013, http://www.gallup.com/poll/164663/americans-trust-government-generally-down-year.aspx. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Gallup. 2014. Public Faith in Congress Falls Again, Hits Historic Low. Of Major U.S. Institutions, Americans Most Confident in the Military, June 2014, http://www.gallup.com/poll/171710/public-faith-congress-falls-again-hits-historic-low.aspx. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Gilens, Martin und Benjamin I. Page. 2014. Testing Theories of American Politics. In Perspectives on Politics, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Corruption Barometer. 2013. Country Report United States of America, http://www.transparency.org/gcb2013/country/?country=united_states. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Grimmer, Justin. 2013. Representational Style in Congress. What Legislators Say and Why it Matters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haerpfer, Christian W., Patrick Bernhagen, Ronald F. Inglehart, und Christian Welzel. 2009. Democratization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Richard A. und David Soskice (Hrsg). 2001. Varieties of Capitalism. The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, Alexander, James Madison und John Jay. 2003. The Federalist Papers. Hrsg. Clinton Rossiter, New York: Signet Classic.

    Google Scholar 

  • iPOLL Databank, The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut. http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu. Zugegriffen am 01.05.2014.

  • Kaiser, Robert. 2013. Act of Congress: How America’s Essential Institution Works, and How It Doesn’t. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, Harold, und Daniel Lerner. 1952. The Comparative Study of Elites. An Introduction and Bibliography. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lauth, Hans-Joachim, und Josef Braml. 2011. The United States of America – a Deficient Democracy. In Regression of Democracy, Hrsg. Gero Erdmann und Marianne Kneuer, 103–132. Wiesbaden: VS Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg, Staffan I., Michael Coppedge, John Gerring, und Jan Teorell. 2014. V-Dem: A New Way to Measure Democracy. Journal of Democracy 25(3): 159–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, Thomas E., und Norman J. Ornstein. 2013. It’s Even Worse Than It Looks. How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morlino, Leonardo. 2012. Changes for Democracy. Actors, Structures, Processes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 2010. Economic Policy Reforms: Going for Growth 2010. http://www.oecd.org/eco/labour/economicpolicyreformsgoingforgrowth2010.htm. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • OECD. 2014. Income Distribution and Poverty. http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=IDD. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014

  • O’Donnell, Guillermo. 2005. Why the Rule of Law Matters. In Assessing the Quality of Democracy, Hrsg. Larry Diamond und Leonardo Morlino. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opensecrets.org. 2014. Reelection Rates Over the Years. https://www.opensecrets.org/bigpicture/reelect.php?cycle=2012. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Packer, George. 2013. The Unwinding. Thirty Years of American Decline. London: Faber und Faber Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pew Forum. 2008. U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. Religious Affiliation: Diverse and Dynamic. http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report-religious-landscape-study-full.pdf. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Pew Research. 2011. Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, Hispanics. http://the100leaders.org/resourcesAssets/pdfs/Wealth%20Gaps%20Rise%20to%20Record%20Highs%20Between%20Whites,%20Blacks,%20Hispanics%20_%20Pew%20Soc.pdf. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Pew Research. 2013. Few See Adequate Limits on NSA Surveillance Program, But More Approve than Disapprove. http://www.people-press.org/2013/07/26/few-see-adequate-limits-on-nsa-surveillance-program. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Piketty, Thomas. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Monty G. 2013. The Polity IV Project. http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Neustadt, Richard E. 1991. Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents. The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell Jr., G. Bingham. 2005. The Chain of Responsiveness. In Assessing the Quality of Democracy, Hrsg. Larry Diamond und Leonardo Morlino. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, Adam. 2010. Democracy and the Limits of Self-Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirk, Paul J., Christian Lammert und Martin Thunert. 2014. 2014 United States Report. Sustainable Governance Indicators. http://www.sgi-network.org/docs/2014/country/SGI2014_USA.pdf. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • Schlozman, Kay L., Sidney Verba, und Henry E. Brady. 2013. The Unheavenly Chorus: Unequal Political Voice and the Broken Promise of American Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, Manfred G. 2010. Demokratietheorien. Eine Einführung, 5. Aufl. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitter, Philippe. 1974. Still the Century of Corporatism? Review of Politics 36(1): 85–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitter, Philippe. 2011. The Future of ‚Real-Existing‘ Democracies. Society and Economy 33(2): 399–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitter, Philippe, und Terry Karl. 1991. What Democracy Is … and Is Not. Journal of Democracy 2/3: 75–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siaroff, Alan. 1999. Corporatism in 24 Industrial Democracies: Meaning and Measurement. European Journal of Political Research 36(2): 175–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siewert, Markus B., und Christian Zettl. 2007. Politische Eliten. In Regierungssystem der USA: Ein Lehr- und Handbuch, Hrsg. Wolfgang Jäger, Christoph M. Haas, und Wolfgang Welz, 347–361. München: Oldenbourg Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, Theda. 2003. Diminished Democracy. From Membership to Management in American Civic Life. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, Theda, und Vanessa Williamson. 2012. The Tea Party and the Remaking of American Conservatism. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Graham. 2009. Democratic Innovations. Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stoiber, Michael. 2011. Die Qualität von Demokratien im Vergleich. Zur Bedeutung des Kontextes in der empirisch vergleichenden Demokratietheorie. Nomos: Baden-Baden.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, Wolfgang. 1994. Staat und Verbände: Neue Fragen. Neue Antworten? In Staat und Verbände, Hrsg. Wolfgang Streeck, 7–34. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • The Telegraph. 2014. Arizona Passes Law Allowing Shopkeepers to Refuse to Serve Gay People. 21.02.2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theriault, Sean M. 2013. The Gingrich Senators. The Roots of Partisan Warfare in Congress. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Truman, David. 1951. The Governmental Process. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagemann, Claudius. 2012. Breakdown and Change of Private Interest Governments. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, David. 2013. Introducing the 2014 Cook Political Report Partisan Voter Index. http://cookpolitical.com/story/5604. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

  • World Economic Forum. 2013. The Global Gender Gap Report 2013. Genf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zakaria, Fareed. 2013. Can America Be Fixed? The New Crisis of Democracy. Foreign Affairs 92(1): 22–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelizer, Julian. 2014. Is There Anything Wrong with a Little Pork Barrel Spending? CNN, 12.05.2014, http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/12/opinion/zelizer-the-case-for-earmarks. Zugegriffen am 01.09.2014.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Grüneburgplatz 1, 60323, Frankfurt, Deutschland

    Markus B. Siewert

  2. FB 03 Gesellschaftswissenschaften, Universität Frankfurt, Grüneburgplatz 1, 60323, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland

    Claudius Wagemann

Authors
  1. Markus B. Siewert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudius Wagemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus B. Siewert .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Christan Lammert

  2. Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany

    Markus Siewert

  3. JFK Institut für Nordamerikastudien Abteilung Politik, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Boris Vormann

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this entry

Cite this entry

Siewert, M.B., Wagemann, C. (2014). Demokratie in der Krise? Zur Qualität der US-amerikanischen Demokratie. In: Lammert, C., Siewert, M., Vormann, B. (eds) Handbuch Politik USA. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04125-0_39-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04125-0_39-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-04125-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Referenz Sozialwissenschaften und Recht

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation