Suchergebnisse

To ascertain how Flemish politicians first enter local politics, interviews were conducted with 797 politicians elected locally in 1994, yielding profiles of demographic & socioeconomic factors, & distinguishing between ascribed status positions derived from politically active family members & achieved status positions through membership in political & other organizations. The expectation that achieved status would take precedence was confirmed. Many politicians were members not only of their respective political parties, but also of workers' unions, health care mutualities, sports clubs, etc. Some 67+% had at least one politically active family member, & 33+% a politically mandated family member, indicating at least some family influence on a successful career in politics. 14 Tables. Adapted from the source document.

International bureaucracy is a phenomenon peculiar to our time, but it is difficult to study: From the outside, studies remain superficial; from the inside, they can become biased. However, certain qualities of this bur'cy appear when we study the civil servants (CS's) of the various European states. Characteristic (1) is the diversity of the various groups of CS's. Each org acts independently; some CS's like those of the CECA, have legal status, while others are hired on a contractual basis. There is also diversity in treatment, in pensions, in conditions of service, & it is impossible to move from one org to another. Characteristic (2) is the uncertainty of the recruitment process: some subordinate positions & important posts are filled in advance; there is also direct recruitment at every level of employment with a consequent risk of cooptation. Furthermore, these civil servants must belong, in a predetermined proportion, to the countries of the various member nations, which of course creates difficulties of all kinds. Finally, it must be recognised that the role of this bur'cy is ill-defined. Psychol'ly, European CS's are in a difficult situation. They feel that they are uprooted, far from the country of their origin, and not part of an established hierarchical framework. Tr by J. A. Broussard from IPSA.

The development of a strict methodology of observation & analysis in soc sci has always met with resistance. In the current debate on this topic in the US, 2 positions can be distinguished. There are the 'theorists,' who find their inspiration in the work of recent philosophers such as H. Marcuse & J.-P. Sartre; they rate the formation of a pol'al theory as a 1st priority. Then there are the 'behaviorists,' whose first care is for sci'fic method. This contrast is reviewed on the basis of the document, "Political Science at Berkeley, An Invitation to a Discussion," which was published anonymously by a group of students. The criticism of these students can be summarized under the headings 'commitment' & 'relevance.' As far as commitment is concerned, the critics reproach the behaviorists for not taking stands in important contemporary moral issues, & for identifying with the status quo. It is argued here that what leads to acceptance of & identification with the existing pol'al order is not behaviorist methodology as such, but rather the mood of the behaviorists. As far as 'relevance' is concerned, the critics are impatient with the futile detail analysis & data collecting of the behaviorists. The behaviorists' use of a strict methodology of explanation by generalization leads to a reduction of the scope of analysis. Then only the 'easy' aspects ('easy' to quantify, 'easy' to collect, etc) are analyzed, & discontinuous developments are neglected. The argument presented here is that the lack of a dynamic theory of the pol'al process is an impediment indeed for pol'al sci, but that, again, behaviorism as such cannot be accused of being 'conservative' or 'conformistic': the refutation of race theories, for example, was rather a radical undertaking. It is concluded that for the time being it is not necessary to lay other bounds on pol'al sci than those that follow from the claims of rational debate & intellectual honesty. HA.