PATTERNS OF POLITICAL THINKING IN THE DEBATE OVER GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN THE ECONOMY: AN INTERPRETIVE ANALYSIS OF NEWSPAPER COMMENTARY, 1969-1974
Abstract
In the technical discourse of public debates over policy in the United States there may often be found a more fundamental debate over political beliefs, values, and institutions. The revived debate over the appropriate role of government in the economy would seem to be especially suited to such fundamental discussions. This dissertation examines the debate over government intervention in wages and prices from 1969 through 1974 as a specific instance of that general debate for the purpose of making explicit the patterns of political thinking implied in its discourse. The concrete sources of the discourse of this debate are the various commentaries which appeared during the Nixon years in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. The various arguments revealed by analysis are drawn together to form two model texts or ideal types. Each text, the "Minimalist" and the "Interventionist," is distinguished from the other by its position, respectively, of opposition to or support for wage and price intervention. The model arguments constituting each model text are compared and contrasted with each other from two thematic perspectives, the "economic" and the "political." This mode of analysis occurs within each model text and between the two model texts from each perspective. The results of this process is a constructed dialogue through which the patterns of political thinking implied in the discourse of the debate are made explicit. The analysis revealed that the debate took place within narrow parameters and that its overall structure can be considered conservative. The preeminent issue in the debate was that over the risks associated with change. Each position was more concerned with risks of finding a political system which would serve the attainment of certain unspecified economic results than with finding a political system which they would believe to be inherently valuable. These conclusions suggest a framework with which other similar debates might be examined for their patterns of political thinking.
Degree
Ph.D.
Subject Area
Political science|Journalism
Off-Campus Purdue Users:
To access this dissertation, please log in to our
proxy server.