Ivor Crewe
University of Essex
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Ivor Crewe.
British Journal of Political Science | 2002
Pamela Johnston Conover; Donald D. Searing; Ivor Crewe
What is the deliberative potential of everyday political discussion? We address this question using survey data and qualitative data collected in six communities in the United States and Britain. Our findings suggest that political discussion is infrequently public, modestly contested and sometimes marred by inequality. But the factors inhibiting more deliberative discussions – structural, cultural and motivational in nature – should be amenable to some change, particularly through education.
British Journal of Political Science | 1977
Ivor Crewe; Bo Särlvik; James E. Alt
Britain enjoys a textbook reputation as the historic home and model representative of a stable two-party system. From the factors most frequently cited by way of explanation – the electoral system, the absence of cross-cutting social cleavages – it is implied that this uncommon state of affairs is a natural and permanent part of British politics. This reputation is, in fact, somewhat exaggerated. At no time have MPs or parliamentary candidates in Britain been confined to two parties only (in contrast to the United States); and for most of the period since the introduction of the majority male franchise and the beginning of mass parties in 1884 the configuration of party forces in the Commons would be best described as multi-party (1884–1922), three-party (1922–31), or dominant one-party (1931–45). Britains experience of a stable two-party politics has therefore been both recent and relatively short-lived; it is only since the Second World War that two parties – Conservative and Labour – have alternated in exclusive incumbency of government office on the basis of an evenly balanced duopoly of electoral support and parliamentary seats.
Political Studies | 1986
Ivor Crewe
How Britain Votes,1 based on the 1983 British Election Study, challenges the consensual view that in recent elections class voting has declined and thereby contributed to Labours electoral misfortunes. It redefines social classes, including the working class, claims that relative class voting shows no evidence of decline, argues that Labours electoral troubles are largely due to the diminishing size of the working class, not its changing character, and infers that Labour need not and should not dilute its explicit working-class appeal. This article shows that these criticisms of previous work are misplaced; that the claim that class voting has not declined is marred by logical, conceptual and measurement flaws; that a class dealignment has undoubtedly occurred; and that the implications for Labours electoral strategy are the opposite of those suggested.
British Journal of Sociology | 1984
Christopher T. Husbands; Bo Särlvik; Ivor Crewe
Preface Note on documentation Note on tables Part I. Political Context and Electoral Change Ivor Crewe: 1. The flow of events 2. The flow of the vote 3. The lockgates on the vote Part II. Issues, Opinion and Party Choice in the 1979 Election Bo Sarlvik: 4. Opinions on political issues and voting - the directions of the enquiry 5. Why the parties were liked and disliked 6. Managing the economy - the Labour governments record and the Conservative alternative 7. Responses to social and cultural change 8. Nationalisation and social welfare policies - a rightward shift in electoral opinion 1974-1979 9. Policy alternatives and party choice in the 1979 election 10. Ambiguity and change in party positions: three special cases 11. The impact of the issues - an overall account 12. The electorate and the party system 13. The making of voting decisions: political opinions and voting intentions during the campaign Part III. A Turning-Point?: 14. At the end of a decade Postscript: realignment in the 1980s? Appendix. Constructing the flow-of-the-vote tables Notes Index.
Contemporary Sociology | 1988
Denis McQuail; Ivor Crewe; Martin Harrop
A unique mixture of academic research, professional experience and personal reflection, Political Communications examines the crucial dialogue between politicians and people that is conducted, via the Press, broadcasting and opinion polls, during the course of a British election campaign. Scholarly analysis is complemented by the contributions of individual experts from advertising agencies, polling organisations and political parties: among the latter is a piece on the successful Conservative campaign by the then chairman Cecil Parkinson. Special attention is paid to the innovative aspects of the 1983 campaign, e.g. the impact of the Alliance parties, of CND, of massively increased opinion polling, and of breakfast television. The concluding section considers election campaigning in the light of these changes, and examines the arguments for the legal regulation of what has become a political process of the utmost significance.
The Journal of Politics | 2004
Pamela Johnston Conover; Donald D. Searing; Ivor Crewe
It is a fundamental ideal of liberal democracy that all citizens should enjoy fully equal citizenship. Yet many minorities are still routinely ignored, excluded, patronized, and not regarded as full members of the political community. This denial of equal standing undermines their equal citizenship. Liberalism and Cultural Pluralism each advocate strategies to improve this situation. Their arguments build upon expectations about how citizens should, can, and do understand membership in the political community. Our survey and focus group data from six matched communities in the United States and Great Britain show how citizens’ understandings of membership in the political community incorporate communitarian attitudes that impede the liberal and cultural pluralist projects.
American Political Science Review | 1988
Ivor Crewe; Donald D. Searing
We address both a puzzle and a theory. The puzzle is posed by the emergence of “Thatcherism,†an un-Conservative ideology that has appeared in an antiideological British Conservative party. We address this puzzle by determining what Thatcherism is and by showing that although it represents a minority viewpoint, it does indeed fit into previous Conservative thinking. The theory in question is the spatial theory of ideological change, which, we argue, is impugned by the circumstances of Thatcherisms construction. We address this theory by investigating potential constituencies at the time of Thatcherisms creation and by examining evidence about the intentions of those who created it. Finally, we seek both to draw out the implications of Mrs. Thatchers campaign to convert the voters to her views and to explain why the same spatial theory that Thatcherism confounds seem confirmed by equally striking cases in postwar British politics.
Political Studies | 1977
James E. Alt; Ivor Crewe; Bo Särlvik
Before the Liberal surge in 1974, survey research stressed that the Liberal vote was electorally volatile, socially representative, and negative in character. Data from 1974 indicates that the volatility of the Liberal vote owes more to the absence of a large core of stable Liberal voters than to any difference among parties in their ability to retain the votes of recent converts. Moreover, the small core of regular Liberal voters is unusually middle-aged and middle-class, socially very different from the larger and socially representative body of occasional Liberal voters. In the eyes of the electorate, the Liberal Party continues to have a diffuse image, largely devoid of any specific policy content. The Party benefited from dissatisfaction with the state of the country, but there is no evidence that an image of classlessness contributed to its electoral success. Moreover, while most Liberal voters did so for some positive reason, many of their reasons had more to do with style than policy, and the personalities of party leaders appear to have had much to do with moving people to consider—if not actually vote for—the Liberal Party.
PS Political Science & Politics | 1991
Ivor Crewe; Pippa Norris
regarded by a jury who undoubtedly knew its own mind when it came to pornography (Alexander v. United States, 271 F.2d 140 (8th Cir. 1959)). Similarly, the university political science professor who testified on the effects of hair length in public schools may have ventured beyond his area of expertise; at least so thought the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (Karr v. Schmidt, 460 F.2d 609, 612-613 (5th Cir. 1972)). Nevertheless, political scientists generally have been respectfully received in most cases reviewed. In many cases their opinions have been central to the resolution of key issues. As awareness of the contributions of social scientists spreads in the legal community, political scientists can expect additional opportunities to test their experience in federal and state courtrooms. About the Author
British Journal of Political Science | 2007
Donald D. Searing; Frederick Solt; Pamela Johnston Conover; Ivor Crewe
In democratic theory, the practice of discussing public affairs has been associated with desirable consequences for citizenship and democracy. We use Anglo-American survey data to examine twelve hypotheses about psychological foundations for four general conditions that such discussions might promote: autonomous citizens, political legitimacy, good representation and democratic communities. Our data combine detailed measures of public discussion with measures of more of its hypothesized civic consequences than have heretofore been available. They also enable us to probe, using specialized samples, causal inferences suggested by our analyses of random samples in our British and American communities. Six of the hypotheses are supported, including at least one regarding each of the four general liberal democratic conditions we investigate.