Professor: Douglas Nelson
Office: Tilton 108 (Murphy Institute), Phone: 865-5317
Office Hours: Tuesday and Thursday, 3:00-5:00
While the development of sophisticated field and laboratory experiments in the social sciences are increasingly throwing light on significant hypotheses in the social sciences, it remains the case that for most large scale hypotheses history is the only viable source of empirical evidence for evaluating those hypotheses. There are a large number of such hypotheses in macro political economy: the fundamental role of class struggle, or inter-industrial struggle, or inter-regional struggle in defining the dynamic trajectory of political economies; the consistency (or inconsistency) of capitalism and democracy; the efficiency (and, thus, welfare superiority) of minimally invasive government; the efficiency of complementary political and economic institutions (varieties of capitalism); Polanyi’s double movement; and many, many others. Of course, history can be deployed in many ways to study such hypotheses. The most common is surely comparative historical analysis of the sort we find in the classic analyses of scholars like Moore, Bendix, Skocpol, Anderson, Tilly and Mann. Those analyses consider a wide range of countries, domains of political economic conflict and countries in an effort to find significant commonalities and differences. In this course we pursue a different strategy. We consider one country (the United States) and two issue areas (international trade policy and international migration policy) over the entire history of the US. What we lose in terms of generalizability, we gain in terms of sustained focus.
PECN 3020 is one of the core courses in the political economy major. I will assume that you have had exposure to economic analysis at least at a level consistent with principles of microeconomics and macroeconomics. I will also assume that you are comfortable with algebra and geometry. Some of the readings and some of the lectures may make use of somewhat more advanced mathematics. I will not expect you to be able to reproduce such analysis on an exam, however I will expect you to make a good faith effort to understand what is being argued and to be able to express informally what the basic argument is, and how it fits into the broader goals of the course.
■This course introduces students to the historical analysis of the interaction between economics and politics with particular application to international trade immigration policy in the US.
■Students should be able to apply a variety of modern theoretical and empirical approaches to the analysis of core issues in historical, macro political economy. Specifically, students should understand that political and economic institutions co-evolve in response to systemic challenges and that the new structures that evolve create a new set of dynamics and constraints when new challenges occur.
■Students should be able to identify core controversies in the analysis of these issues and should develop theoretical frameworks, historical and quantitative data sufficient to support making well-grounded evaluations of those controversies.
Readings for the course will be drawn from:
Douglas Irwin (2017). The Battle over U.S. Trade Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Irwin]
Susan Martin (2011). A Nation of Immigrants. New York: Cambridge University Press. [Martin]
Morton Keller (2007). America’s Three Regimes: A New Political History. New York: Oxford University Press. [Keller]
The syllabus also includes a number of additional readings, most available online and linked from the online version of this syllabus. Note that readings marked by a “■” are required and readings marked by a “○” are mostly there to remind me of things I should check, but they also make great supplementary readings. An excellent supplementary reading treating the history of US trade policy from a political perspective is:
C. Donald Johnson (2018). The Wealth of a Nation: A History of Trade Politics in America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [Johnson]
Johnson is not required for this course, but I will note where chapters from this book fit for those interested in a more political perspective.
Evaluation: Your performance in this course will be evaluated on the basis of 2 examinations (worth 100 points each); 4 tutorial papers, and 1 research paper (worth 100 points). To receive an A, you must earn at least 90 percent of the points available. To pass the course you must earn at last 60 percent of the points available. Grades between these limits will be determined on the basis of your performance relative to that of the class as a whole.
Examination format. Both exams will have the following format: about 40% short answer questions and about 60% essays. In general there will be more questions of both types than must be answered, so you will have some choice (though there is often one mandatory question which everyone must answer). Exams must be written in blue books, which you must supply.
Policy on examinations. The midterm exam will be given on 2 March. Unless you have a standard university accepted excuse for missing the exam (e.g. health), you must take the exams at their scheduled time. If you miss the first two exams there will be a makeup exam (given during finals week). Note: to be eligible to take a makeup exam you must have a legitimate excuse for having missed the regular exam. The final examination will only be given on the scheduled date: The final examination will only be given on the scheduled date: Thursday, 11 May, 4:00-7:00pm (there will be no exceptions so do not make travel plans that conflict with this).
Policy on reaction papers. I will divide the class into 3 groups. Every week, every member of one of those groups (to be specified on the first day of class) will prepare a paper on that week’s reading. This is not a group project; every member of the group prepares their own paper. The papers should identify and discuss some significant element of that week’s readings. The papers should be 3 or 5 pages long and, on a separate page, should include 5 questions for the group to discuss. The papers will be due no later than 5pm on the day before we discuss the material (usually on the Monday before we meet). Late papers will not be accepted and will earn a zero.
Research paper. Every student in the course is required to produce a research paper on some aspect of the political economy trade and/or migration policy considered historically. Thus, you might want to pursue some historical episode of trade policy in more detail, or develop an interpretation alternative (or complementary) to those developed in the readings or lectures. Alternatively, you might develop a comparative analysis of immigration policy in another country over some well-defined historical period (e.g. Argentina’s immigration policy at the end of the 19th century). Whatever you choose, remember that the core of the paper must be positive political-economic analysis. These papers must be original work, plagiarism will not be tolerated. Broadly speaking, I expect papers in the 15-20 page range (i.e. about 3,750-5,000 words). To ensure that topics are well-established and suitable for the course, I require a proposal due no later than the fifth week of the course (i.e.14 February). Late proposals will result in a 10 point penalty to be assessed on the paper’s final score. Research papers are due at the last regular meeting of the course (i.e. 2 May). Late papers will not be accepted, and will earn a score of 0 points.
Some Good Advice (At No Extra Charge): First, keep current with the reading. Second, ask questions in class. If you read something and it is unclear and then it is unclear during lecture, ask about it. Your classmates will probably thank you. This is one of the few ways, before an exam, that I can gauge how the material is getting across. Finally, come see me during my office hours. This is another opportunity to get clarification and help on material about which you are unclear. But don’t wait until the last minute, by then it is usually too late.
Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Statement (EDI)
“Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) are important Tulane values that are key drivers of academic excellence in our learning environments. In our drive for academic excellence, we seek to ensure that students, faculty, and staff across diverse social identities, cultural backgrounds, and lived experiences can thrive – especially those from from underrepresented and underserved communities (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, social class, international, veterans, religious minorities, age, and any other classification protected by applicable law – see Tulane’s Nondiscrimination Policy). In order to build a supportive culture and climate for every member of our community, we recognize that we each of have unique EDI strengths to share with others and that we also have areas for EDI growth, learning, and change. This EDI commitment and cultural humility helps us collectively build a university community and culture where everyone experiences belonging.”
Tulane University recognizes the inherent dignity of all individuals and promotes respect for all people.
As such, Tulane is committed to providing an environment free of all forms of discrimination including sexual and gender-based discrimination, harassment, and violence like sexual assault, intimate partner violence, and stalking. If you (or someone you know) has experienced or is experiencing these types of behaviors, know that you are not alone. Resources and support are available: you can learn more at allin.tulane.edu. Any and all of your communications on these matters will be treated as either “Confidential” or “Private” as explained in the chart below. Please know that if you choose to confide in me I am mandated by the university to report to the Title IX Coordinator, as Tulane and I want to be sure you are connected with all the support the university can offer. You do not need to respond to outreach from the university if you do not want. You can also make a report yourself, including an anonymous report, through the form at tulane.edu/concerns.
|Except in extreme circumstances, involving imminent danger to one’s self or others, nothing will be shared without your explicit permission. |
§ Counseling & Psychological Services (CAPS) | (504) 314-2277
§ The Line (24/7) | (504) 264-6074
§ Student Health Center | (504) 865-5255
§ Sexual Aggression Peer Hotline and Education (SAPHE) | (504) 654-9543
|Conversations are kept as confidential as possible, but information is shared with key staff members so the University can offer resources and accommodations and take action if necessary for safety reasons. |
§ Case Management & Victim Support Services | (504) 314-2160 or email@example.com
§ Tulane University Police (TUPD) | Uptown – (504) 865-5911 | Downtown – (504) 988-5531
§ Office of University Sexual Misconduct Response and Title IX Administration | (504) 865-5611 or firstname.lastname@example.org
§ Student Affairs Professional On-Call (24/7) | (504) 920-9900
Emergency Preparedness & Response:(REQUIRED by University Policy as stated here)
|EMERGENCY NOTIFICATIONS: TU ALERT||SEVERE WEATHER|
|In the event of a campus emergency, Tulane University will notify students, faculty, and staff by email, text, and/or phone call. You were automatically enrolled in this system when you enrolled at the university. |
Check your contact information annually in Gibson Online to confirm its accuracy.
|§ Follow all TU Alerts and outdoor warning sirens |
§ Seek shelter indoors until the severe weather threat has passed and an all-clear message is given
§ Do not use elevators
§ Do not attempt to travel outside if weather is severe
Monitor the Tulane Emergency website (tulane.edu/emergency/) for university-wide closures during a severe weather event
|ACTIVE SHOOTER / VIOLENT ATTACKER||EVERBRIDGE APP|
§ For more information or to schedule a training, visit emergencyprep.tulane.edu
|§ Download the Everbridge app from the App Store or Google Play store |
§ The Report feature allows you to silently and discreetly communicate with TUPD dispatchers
§ The SOS button allows you to notify TUPD if you need help
§ The Safe Corridor button serves as a virtual escort and allows you to send check-in notifications to TUPD
From: Tulane Office of Emergency Preparedness and Response
Tulane University strives to make all learning experiences as accessible as possible. If you anticipate or experience academic barriers based on your disability, please let me know immediately so that we can privately discuss options. I will never ask for medical documentation from you to support potential accommodation needs. Instead, to establish reasonable accommodations, I may request that you register with the Goldman Center for Student Accessibility. After registration, make arrangements with me as soon as possible to discuss your accommodations so that they may be implemented in a timely fashion. Goldman Center contact information: email@example.com; (504) 862-8433; accessibility.tulane.edu.
Code of Academic Conduct
The Code of Academic Conduct applies to all undergraduate students, full-time and part-time, in Tulane University. Tulane University expects and requires behavior compatible with its high standards of scholarship. By accepting admission to the university, a student accepts its regulations (i.e., Code of Academic Conduct and Code of Student Conduct) and acknowledges the right of the university to take disciplinary action, including suspension or expulsion, for conduct judged unsatisfactory or disruptive.
Religious Accommodation Policy
Per Tulane’s religious accommodation policy (with hyperlink), I will make every reasonable effort to ensure that students are able to observe religious holidays without jeopardizing their ability to fulfill their academic obligations. Excused absences do not relieve the student from the responsibility for any course work required during the period of absence. Students should notify me within the first two weeks of the semester about their intent to observe any holidays that fall on a class day or on the day of the final exam.
I am aware that Tulane students are able to read a standard university syllabus and determine the content of the course and its relation to the major and the individual student’s course of study. However, the administration of Tulane University, along with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS–which “accredits” primary and secondary schools as well as all varieties of 2 and 4 year undergraduate programs [with very little in the way of adjustment in rubrics, metrics, etc.]), has determined that you require additional information. I collect this material in a separate section so that you can refer to it, or discard it, as you consider appropriate.
STUDENT OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES: By the end of the course, the student should be able to think, speak, and write fluently and competently about the ideas and issues covered in the course (as reflected in the course description and the syllabus). The student should have a solid understanding of the social, political, economic, and philosophical significance of ideas and concepts in the analysis of modern democratic, capitalist political economies and they should be familiar with major ideas and theories regarding explanations, interpretations, applications, and criticisms of work on democratic, capitalist political economies. The student should be able to formulate critical views concerning these issues and respond fluently and competently to questions concerning these views.
1. Students will be able to identify and recognize major themes, ideas, and concepts.
2. Students will analyze, interpret, and discuss these ideas in a scholarly and coherent manner.
3. Students will construct, formulate, and develop creative and critical scholarly assessments.
4. Students will appraise, evaluate, and appreciate the values and consequences of these ideas.
Topic I. Introduction to the Study of History and Political Economy
● 17 January: Why Study History for Political Economy
■ Corfield (2007). “All People are Living Histories: Which is Why History Matters”. Making History website.
■ Gopnik (2014). “Does It Help to Know History,” New Yorker, online article.
○ Nunn (2009). “The Importance of History for Economic Development.” Annual Review of Economics, V.1-#1, 65-92.
● 19 January: The Long View of American Political Development
■ McCormick (1986). “Political Parties in American History,” in The Party Period and Public Policy. New York: Oxford University Pres, 143-96. [Canvas]
■ Brady and Han (2006). “Polarization Then and Now: A Historical Perspective,” in P. S. Nivola and D. W. Brady eds, Red and Blue Nation: Characteristics and Causes of America’s Polarized Politics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 119-51. [Canvas]
○ Schofield, Miller & Martin (2003). “Critical Elections and Political Realignments in the USA: 1860-2000”. Political Studies, V.51-# 2, 217-240.
● 24 & 26 January: The Long View of Structural Change and Globalization
■ Gordon (2016). “The Ascent and Descent of Growth”. Chapter 1 of The Rise and Fall of American Growth. Princeton: PUP.
■ Lindert and Williamson (2016). “Unequal Gains: American Growth and Inequality since 1700”. VOXeu post.
■ Bordo, Eichengreen and Irwin (1999). “Is Globalization Today Really Different from 100 Years Ago?,” in R. Lawrence and S. Collins eds, Brookings Trade Forum–1999. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1-71.
○ Baldwin (2006). “Globalisation: The Great Unbundling(s),” in Globalisation Challenges for Europe. Helsinki: Prime Minister’s Office, 11-54. [only pp. 15-40] [Canvas]
● Optional: A quick review of some basic economics
● Optional: Some Simple Analytics for PE of Migration
■ Gaston and Nelson (2000). “Immigration and Labour Market Outcomes in the United States: A Political-Economy Puzzle.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, V.16-#3, 104-14.
● Optional: Some Simple Analytics for PE of Trade
■ Irwin, Introduction
● 31 January & 2 February: Time, Institutions, Group Identity, Culture, etc.
■ Thelen (1999). “Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science, V.2-#1, 369-404.
■ McCormick (1974). “Ethno-Cultural Interpretations of Nineteenth-Century American Voting Behavior.” Political Science Quarterly, V.89-#2, 351-77.
■ Achen & Bartels (2016). “Democracy for Realists: Holding Up A Mirror to the Electorate”. Juncture, V.22-#4, pp. 269-275.
■ Martin, Chapter 1
Topic II. The Early Development of US Trade & Migration Policy
● 7 & 9 February: Republicanism, Democracy & Capitalism in the Colonial Period
■ Keller, Chapter 1 & 2
■ Irwin, Chapter 1
○ Martin, Chapters 2-4
○ Conway (2020). “Colonial Politics“. Baker and Critchlow, The Oxford Handbook of American Political History. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 11-26.
○ Sokoloff & Engerman (2000). “Institutions, Factor Endowments, and Paths of Development in the New World”. Journal of Economic Perspectives, V.14-#3, pp. 217-232.
○ Wood (1990). “Classical Republicanism and the American Revolution”. Chicago-Kent Law Review; V.66-#3, pp. 13-38.
○ Wood (1999). “Was America Born Capitalist?“. The Wilson Quarterly, V.23-#2, pp. 36-46.
○ Fischer (1989). Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America. New York: Oxford University Press.
○ McCusker & Menard (1991). The Economy of British America, 1607-1789. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
○ Wood (1992). The Radicalism of the American Revolution. New York: Knopf.
● 14 & 16 February: Republicanism, Democracy & Capitalism in the Young Republic
■ Keller, Chapter 3
■ Irwin, Chapter 2
■ Martin, Chapter 5
○ Brooke (2020). “The Early Republic, 1789–1815“. Baker and Critchlow, The Oxford Handbook of American Political History. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 45-61.
○ Schofield (2002). “Evolution of the Constitution.” British Journal of Political Science, V.32-#1, 1-20.
○ Johnson, Chapter 1
○ Shalhope (1993). “Republicanism, Liberalism, and Democracy: Political Culture in the New Nation“. Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, V.102, pp. 99-152.
○ Wood (2009). Empire of Liberty: A History of the Early Republic, 1789-1815. New York: Oxford University Press.
20-21 February: Tulane Carnival Break
● 23 & 28 February: Jackson, the 2nd Party System & Sectional Crisis
■ Keller, Chapter 4 & 5
■ Irwin, Chapter 3
■ Martin, Chapter 6
○ Watson (2020). “Democrats and Whigs: The Second American Party System“. Baker and Critchlow, The Oxford Handbook of American Political History. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 62-78.
○ Schofield (2004). “The Quandaries of Slavery and Civil War in the US.” Homo Oeconomicus V.21-#2, 315-54.
○ Sellers (1991). The Market Revolution: Jacksonian America, 1815-1846. New York: Oxford University Press.
○ Howe (2007). What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848. New York: Oxford University Press.
○ Beckert (2014). Empire of Cotton: A Global History. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
○ Schermerhorn (2015). The Business of Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism, 1815-1860.
○Engerman (2017). “Review of The Business of Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism, 1815-1860 by Calvin Schermerhorn and The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism by Edward Baptist”. Journal of Economic Literature; V55-#2, pp. 637-643.
○ Wright (2022). “Slavery and the Rise of the Nineteenth-Century American Economy”. Journal of Economic Perspectives; V.36-#2, pp. 123-148.
○ Johnson, Chapter 2
2 March: Midterm Exam
● 7 & 9 March: The 3rd Party System, Civil War & Reconstruction
■ Keller, Chapter 6
■ Irwin, Chapters 4
■ Martin, Chapter 7
○ Ashworth (2020). “The Politics of Slavery and the Coming Civil War“. Baker and Critchlow, The Oxford Handbook of American Political History. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 79-95.
○ Kleppner (1979). The Third Electoral System, 1853-1892: Parties, Voters and Political Cultures. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
○ McPherson (1988). Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era. New York: Oxford University Press.
○ White (2017). The Republic for Which It Stands: The United States during Reconstruction and the Gilded Age, 1865-1896. New York: Oxford University Press. [Part I, pp. 1-321]
○ Bensel (1990). Yankee Leviathan: The Origin of Central State Authority in America, 1859-1877. New York: Cambridge University Press.
○ Foner (2014). A Short History of Reconstruction, 1863-1877. New York: Harper & Row.
○ Riker (1982). “Manipulation and the Natural Selection of Issues: The Development of the Issue of Slavery as a Prelude to the American Civil War”. Chapter 9 of Liberalism against Populism: A Confrontation between the Theory of Democracy and the Theory of Social Choice. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, pp. 213-232. [Canvas]
○ Riker (1986). “Lincoln at Freeport”. Chapter 1 of The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 1-9. [Canvas]
○ Weingast (1998). “Political stability and civil war: Institutions, commitment, and American democracy,” Bates,Greif, Levi & Rosenthal, eds. Analytic Narratives. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 148-193.
○ Schofield (2003). “Constitutional Quandaries and Critical Elections.” Politics, Philosophy & Economics, V.2-#1, 5-36.
○ Johnson, Chapter 3.
● 14 & 16 March: Industrialization, The Gilded Age & the End of the 3rd Party System
■ Keller, Chapters 7 & 8
■ Irwin, Chapters 5 & 6
■ Martin, Chapter 8
○ Baker (2020). “Politics in the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era“. Baker and Critchlow, The Oxford Handbook of American Political History. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 115-134.
○ White (2017). The Republic for Which It Stands: The United States during Reconstruction and the Gilded Age, 1865-1896. New York: Oxford University Press. [Parts II & III, pp. 323-872]
○ Brands (2010). American Colossus: The Triumph of Capitalism, 1865-1900. New York: Doubleday.
○ Bensel (2000). The Political Economy of American Industrialization, 1877-1900. New York: Cambridge University Press.
○ Johnson, Chapter 4 & 5
● 21 & 23 March: The 4th Party System, Progressivism & The Inter-War Years
■ Keller, Chapter 9
■ Irwin, Chapters 7 & 8
■ Martin, Chapter 9
○ Skowronek (1982). Building the New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877-1920.
○ Rauchway (2006). Blessed among nations: how the world made America. New York: Hill & Wang.
○ McGerr (2003). A fierce discontent: the rise and fall of the Progressive movement in America, 1870-1920. New York: Free Press.
○ Flanagan (2007). America reformed: Progressives and progressivisms, 1890s-1920s. New York: Oxford University Press.
○ Lears (2009). Rebirth of a nation: the making of modern America, 1877-1920. New York: HarperCollins.
○ Leuchtenburg (1993). The Perils of Prosperity, 1914-1932. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
○ Hochschild (2022). American midnight: the Great War, a violent peace, and democracy’s forgotten crisis. New York: Mariner Books.
○ Schattschneider (1960). “The Nationalization of Politics: A Case Study in the Changing Dimensions of Politics”. Chapter 5 in The Semisovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. Boston: Wadsworth, pp. 76-94.
○ Burnham (1981). “The System of 1896: An Analysis”. Kleppner, Burnham, Formisano, Hays & Shade, The Evolution of American Electoral Systems. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, pp. 147-202.
○ Sundquist (1983). “The Realignment of the 1890s”. Chapter 7 of Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings, pp. 134-169.
○ Johnson, Chapter 6
Topic III. From Depression to Anti-Globalization, The New Deal
● 28 & 30 March: Depression, War & the New Deal
■ Keller, Chapter 10
■ Irwin, Chapters 9 & 10
○ Romer (1993). “The Nation in Depression“. Journal of Economic Perspectives; V.7-#2, pp. 19-39.
○ Smith (2020). “The Politics of Depression and War“. Baker and Critchlow, The Oxford Handbook of American Political History. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 135-150.
○ Bernstein (1987). The Great Depression: Delayed Recovery and Economic Change in America, 1929-1939. New York: Cambridge University Press.
○ Stein (1990). The Fiscal Revolution in America (revised edition). Washington, DC: AEI Press. [Chapters 1-8]
○ Leuchtenburg (1963). Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, 1932-1940. New York: Harper & Row.
○ Kennedy (1999). Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945. New York: Oxford University Press.
○ Katznelson (2013). Fear itself: the New Deal and the origins of our time. New York: Liveright Publishing.
○ Johnson, Chapter 7-14
3-9 April: Tulane Spring Break
● 11 & 13 April: The Golden Age and the 5th Party System
■ Keller, Chapter 11
■ Irwin, Chapter 11
■ Martin, Chapter 10
○ DiSalvo (2020). “Party Politics and National Policy, Post–World War II“. Baker and Critchlow, The Oxford Handbook of American Political History. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 151-177.
○ Gerstle (2022). “The New Deal Order, 1930-1980”. Part I of The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in a Free Market Era. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 17-69.
○ Hall, ed. (1989). The Political Power of Economic Ideas: Keynesianism Across Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
○ Stein (1990). The Fiscal Revolution in America (revised edition). Washington, DC: AEI Press. [Chapters 9-17]
○Glyn, Huges, Lipietz & Singh (1990). “The Rise and Fall of the Golden Age”. in Marglin & Schor, The Golden Age of Capitalism: Reinterpreting the Postwar Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 39-3125.
○ Patterson (1996). Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945-1974. New York: Oxford University Press.
○ Ruggie (1982). “International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Post-War Economic Order“. International Organization; V.36-#2, pp. 379-415.
○ Nelson (1989). “The Domestic Political Preconditions of US Trade Policy: Liberal Structure and Protectionist Dynamics“. Journal of Public Policy; V.9-#1, pp. 83-108.
○ Johnson, Chapter 15
● 18 & 20 April: Greater Globalization, Growing Unease
■ Keller, Chapter 12
■ Irwin, Chapter 12
■ Martin, Chapter 11
○ Gerstle (2022). “The Neoliberal Order, 1970-2020”. Part II of The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in a Free Market Era. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 71-293.
○ Miller and Schofield (2008). “The Transformation of the Republican and Democratic Party Coalitions in the U.S.” Perspectives on Politics, V.6-#3, 433-50.
○ Schnidman and Schofield (2013). “Quandaries of Gridlock and Leadership in US Electoral Politics,” in N. Schofield, G. Caballero and D. Kselman eds, Advances in Political Economy: Institutions, Modelling and Empirical Analysis. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 91-127.
○ McCarty, Poole and Rosenthal (2006). Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
○ Mann and Ornstein (2012). It’s even worse than it looks: how the American constitutional system collided with the new politics of extremism. New York: Basic Books.
○ Fiorina (2017). Unstable majorities: polarization, party sorting, and political stalemate. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
○ Johnson, Chapter 16 (486-503)
● 25 & 27 April: Globalization Backlash
■ Irwin, Chapter 13
■ Martin, Chapter 12 & 13
○ Rodrik (2018). Populism and the Economics of Globalization”. Journal of International Business Policy, V.1-#1, pp. 12-33.
○ Hoekman & Nelson (2018). “Reflecting on populism and the economics of globalization”. Journal of International Business Policy, V.1-#1, pp. 34-43.
○ Norris and Inglehart (2018). Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and the rise of authoritarian-populism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
○ Mutz (2018). “Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote“. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences; V.115-#19, pp. E4330-E4339.
○ Mutz (2021). Winners and losers: the psychology of foreign trade. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
○ Johnson, Chapter 16 (503-527)
● 2 May: Where Are We Now, Where Are We Going?
■ Irwin, Conclusion
○ Johnson, Conclusion
Final Examination: Thursday, 11 May, 4:00-7:00pm.