Bøger af Thomas J. Volgy

Political shocks have come to be considered highly salient for explaining major changes to international politics and to the foreign policies of states. Such shocks can occur at all levels of analysis: domestically, dyadically, regionally, or globally. They range from political phenomena such as coups and wars to ecological catastrophes. These shocks are sufficiently disruptive to cause foreign policy makers to reconsider their foreign policy orientations and to contemplate major changes to their policies. In fact, some have argued that it is mostly through political shocks that fundamental policy change occurs in most states. No wonder then that political shocks are now increasingly part of the toolbox of considerations used by foreign policy and international relations scholars as they focus on understanding patterns of conflict and cooperation between states. Given the salience of political shocks to understand foreign policy change, this book brings together a group of both senior and more junior scholars whose previous work has shown substantial promise for moving forward theory and empirical analysis. Their combined efforts in this book highlight the value of multiple theoretical and empirical approaches to a clearer understanding of the nature of political shocks and their consequences for foreign policy and international politics.

This edited book complements and follows up on the book, Thompson and Volgy et al, Regions, Power and Conflict: Constrained Capabilities, Hierarchy, and Rivalry. It is predicated in part on the paucity of published material available on comparing regional international politics. Monadic, dyadic, and systemic approaches all have their uses and have been exploited extensively. The same cannot be said about comparative regional analysis. The premise is that a great deal of international politics takes place within regional parameters. Most states simply lack the capability or interest in devoting many resources to extra-regional affairs. Yet each region is distinctive. In some, military coups remain common while they have died out as a form of political practice in others. A few have been highly conflictual and then become more pacific, while others persist in their conflict intensity. Some have powerful neighbors with intervention tendencies, while others are surrounded by relatively weak states. Some are rich; others are poor. The point is that regions, all with proper names, have attributes that can be harnessed through comparison to explain why regional behavior differs greatly across the planet. The aim is to replace the proper names with the leading variables that appear to drive behavior. For instance, to shrug and say ¿that¿s the Middle East for yoü does not take us very far. Replacing the Middle East label with conceptualization about how a set of small, weak, autocratic states behave subject to high penetration by major powers might take us farther than shrugging off regional identity. We have good reasons to think that comparative regional analysis can deliver an explanatory value-added product just as much as alternative ¿levels of analysis¿ can. Ultimately, we might desire to integrate separate levels of analysis, rather than segregating them. But in the short term,we need to encourage comparative regional analysis because it is the least developed perspective. Why that might be the case can be debated, but it stems in part from our disciplinary tendencies for some analysts to specialize in regional behavior largely in a descriptive vein while others prefer to focus on explaining universal behavior. Comparative regional behavior tends to be squeezed out by regional scholars who suspect generalization about behavior and universal scholars who suspect particular contexts such as regions. Comparative regional analysis requires analysts who are willing to explore generalization but acknowledge regional contexts more explicitly than is customary. At the same time, more general substitutes for those regional labels must be introduced if explanatory headway is to be achieved.

"John E. Schwarz and Thomas J. Volgy have joined forces to produce an incisive analysis of the nation's economic problems, illustrated their book with real people, and linked their material to the political process. This is a major contribution to the most important debate taking place in America. -Thomas B. Edsall

Mapping the New World Order is a ground-breaking new study mapping the growth and development of the web of intergovernmental organizations. The book systematically traces similarities and differences between the institutional architecture of the Cold War and post-Cold War eras.

Ask most Americans what they think of politics and you'll likely get an earful. With suspicion and distrust of public servants running high, many citizens seem dispirited by the very process that has made the United States a showcase for democracy. Now ask Tom Volgy. This former mayor of a major western city, who is also a political scientist, contends that most elected officials are the very opposite of what the public thinks: honest, hardworking people whose real work goes unnoticed by most of their constituents and the media. Volgy has interviewed more than 300 elected officials--mayors, city council members, legislators--from all over the United States to offer a decidedly contrarian view of politics. He explores the lives and working conditions of elected officials at the local level-- the area of democracy closest to the public-- to show that officeholders are for the most part average citizens, not the slick lawyers or political pros we usually imagine them to be. Most are motivated by a sense of civic duty, and they often work for token salaries, yet once elected they give up their personal lives and fall prey to every conceivable brickbat of public and media outrage. In "Politics in the Trenches," Volgy shows what really happens behind the scenes of government. He contrasts perception with reality regarding the rewards and perks of office. He examines the process of experimentation in the political laboratory and shows how the news media distort it. He provides a case study of homelessness to illustrate the system's constraints and limitations. And he offers a chapter on a typical week in office that will be an eye-opener for most readers. Although admittedly there are manyflaws in the democratic political process, observes Volgy, all are correctable as long as citizens believe in the essential worth of the system itself. His book offers a fresh perspective on democratic governance and tackles tough issues such as campaign finance reform, urging citizens to understand the process before they condemn its players out of hand. More than that, this is a call to action, warning us that we could lose true democracy if we don't get involved.