State Political Culture
Overview
State Political Culture
Learning Objective
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
Discuss how the political culture of Texas influences its government, public policy, and the challenges it faces today
Introduction: Daniel Elazar's Cultural Classification
Some states, such as Alaska, are endowed with natural resources. They can use their oil or natural gas reserves to their advantage to fund
education or reduce taxes. Other states, like Florida, are favored with a climate that attracts tourists and retirees each winter, drawing in
revenues to support infrastructure improvements throughout the state. These differences can lead to strategic advantages in the economic
fortunes of a state, which can translate into differences in the levels of taxes that must be collected from citizens.
But their economic fortunes are only one component of what makes individual states unique. Theorists have long proposed that states are also
unique as a function of their differing political cultures, or their attitudes and beliefs about the functions and expectations of the government. In
the book, American Federalism: A View from the States, Daniel Elazar first theorized in 1966 that the United States could be divided into three
distinct political cultures: moralistic, individualistic, and traditionalistic. The diffusion of these cultures throughout the United States is attributed
to the migratory patterns of immigrants who settled in and spread out across the country from the east to the west coast. These settlers had
distinct political and religious values that influenced their beliefs about the proper role of government, the need for citizen involvement in the
democratic process, and the role of political parties.
, Figure 1.17 Daniel Elazar posited that the United States can be divided geographically into three types of political cultures—individualistic,
moralistic, and traditionalistic—which spread with the migratory patterns of immigrants across the country.
Moralistic Political Culture
In Elazar’s framework, states with a moralistic political culture see the government as a means to better society and promote the general
welfare. They expect political officials to be honest in their dealings with others, put the interests of the people they serve above their own, and
commit to improving the area they represent. The political process is seen in a positive light and not as a vehicle tainted by corruption. In fact,
citizens in moralistic cultures have little patience for corruption and believe that politicians should be motivated by a desire to benefit the
community rather than by a need to profit financially from service.
Moralistic states thus tend to support an expanded role for government. They are more likely to believe government should promote the
general welfare by allocating funds to programs that will benefit the poor. In addition, they see it as the duty of public officials to advocate for
new programs that will benefit marginal citizens or solve public policy problems, even when public pressure to do so is nonexistent.
Overview
State Political Culture
Learning Objective
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
Discuss how the political culture of Texas influences its government, public policy, and the challenges it faces today
Introduction: Daniel Elazar's Cultural Classification
Some states, such as Alaska, are endowed with natural resources. They can use their oil or natural gas reserves to their advantage to fund
education or reduce taxes. Other states, like Florida, are favored with a climate that attracts tourists and retirees each winter, drawing in
revenues to support infrastructure improvements throughout the state. These differences can lead to strategic advantages in the economic
fortunes of a state, which can translate into differences in the levels of taxes that must be collected from citizens.
But their economic fortunes are only one component of what makes individual states unique. Theorists have long proposed that states are also
unique as a function of their differing political cultures, or their attitudes and beliefs about the functions and expectations of the government. In
the book, American Federalism: A View from the States, Daniel Elazar first theorized in 1966 that the United States could be divided into three
distinct political cultures: moralistic, individualistic, and traditionalistic. The diffusion of these cultures throughout the United States is attributed
to the migratory patterns of immigrants who settled in and spread out across the country from the east to the west coast. These settlers had
distinct political and religious values that influenced their beliefs about the proper role of government, the need for citizen involvement in the
democratic process, and the role of political parties.
, Figure 1.17 Daniel Elazar posited that the United States can be divided geographically into three types of political cultures—individualistic,
moralistic, and traditionalistic—which spread with the migratory patterns of immigrants across the country.
Moralistic Political Culture
In Elazar’s framework, states with a moralistic political culture see the government as a means to better society and promote the general
welfare. They expect political officials to be honest in their dealings with others, put the interests of the people they serve above their own, and
commit to improving the area they represent. The political process is seen in a positive light and not as a vehicle tainted by corruption. In fact,
citizens in moralistic cultures have little patience for corruption and believe that politicians should be motivated by a desire to benefit the
community rather than by a need to profit financially from service.
Moralistic states thus tend to support an expanded role for government. They are more likely to believe government should promote the
general welfare by allocating funds to programs that will benefit the poor. In addition, they see it as the duty of public officials to advocate for
new programs that will benefit marginal citizens or solve public policy problems, even when public pressure to do so is nonexistent.
