Premium
Time to Think in Other Terms: A Response to Powell and the Median Mandate School
Author(s) -
Warwick Paul V.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
legislative studies quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.728
H-Index - 54
eISSN - 1939-9162
pISSN - 0362-9805
DOI - 10.1111/lsq.12172
Subject(s) - ideology , congruence (geometry) , mandate , illusion , political science , epistemology , positive economics , law , social psychology , psychology , philosophy , economics , politics , cognitive psychology
In response to my characterization of ideological congruence as an “illusion,” Powell (this issue) demonstrates that incongruence, while common, tends to be only moderate in most cases, a conclusion with which I agree. Nevertheless, I argue that the concept of ideological congruence is misleading when applied as Powell does, and problematic, if not meaningless, when applied in the alternative ways proposed by Best, Budge, and McDonald. For these reasons, the term continues to obscure more than it reveals.