Democracy, Toleration, and the Strains of French Politics

公民在压力下对民主实践的承诺是我们提议的研究的独特目标。 一系列著名的研究为公民对一系列民主价值观的支持提供了基准观点（Stouffer，1955; McClosky，1964; McClosky和Brill，1983;吉布森，1988; Sullivan等人，1978年，1982年）。 虽然民主价值观的范围很广，但对承诺这些价值观的条件的审查仍然很窄。 对政治问题态度的评估通常是在刻意保持中立的条件下进行的。 问题的措辞，替代方案的框架，甚至面试官的举止都是为了消除（或至少是为了平衡）受访者对公共问题采取一个而不是另一个方面的压力（对于开创性的例外，见Marcus et al.，1995;吉布森，1998）。 这些研究是有价值的，但是，如果要理解处于压力之下的民主政治，就有必要审查处于压力之下的公民的承诺。 他们有多愿意荣誉对民主价值观的承诺？不是在人为中立的情况下权衡自己的选择，而是在压力下做出选择。 当他们面对相互竞争的价值观时，他们是否准备好了资格，甚至放弃他们？ 什么样的压力-信息的、规范的、社会的或意识形态的压力-对公民对民主价值观的承诺造成最大的压力？ 为谁？ 为什麽？ 对民主政治的实践有什么后果？我们所提出的研究旨在开辟新的领域，以了解法国或其他地方的公民在相互竞争的价值观的压力下或面对对权威的呼吁-包括对民意权威的呼吁-时，是支持还是放弃民主原则。 为此，我们与巴黎的法国政治生活研究中心（CEVIPOF）和里昂的政治研究所（CERIP）建立了伙伴关系。 每个人都有独特的方法论专长。 CEVIPOF小组是过去20年来法国选举政治研究的主要调查研究小组（Boy和Mayer，1993年; Boy和Mayer，1997年; Mayer，1997年）。 CERIP小组一直是通过密切观察和密集采访研究普通公民政治的主要论坛。 我们的小组集中在结婚，通过计算机辅助采访，推理的力量与代表性样本的描述强度的随机实验。 通过共同努力，我们可以进行一项研究，这是我们自己无法完成的。

The commitment of citizens to democratic practices under pressure is the distinctive objective of the study that we propose. A celebrated series of studies has provided a benchmark view of citizens' support for an array of democratic values (Stouffer, 1955; McClosky, 1964; McClosky and Brill, 1983; Gibson, 1988; Sullivan et al., 1978, 1982). Although the coverage of democratic values is wide, the examination of the conditions of commitment to them remains narrow. The assessment of attitudes toward political issues typically is carried out in conditions that deliberately are studiously neutral. The wording of questions, the framing of alternatives, and even the demeanor of the interviewers are designed to eliminate (or at least to balance) the pressure on respondents to take one, rather than another, side of a public issue (for pioneering exceptions, see Marcus et al., 1995; Gibson, 1998). These studies are valuable but, if the politics of democracies under strain is to be grasped, it is necessary to examine the commitments of citizens under pressure. How willing are they to honor their commitments to democratic values, not when they weigh their choices in an an artificially neutral situation, but when they must make them under pressure? How ready are they to qualify, or even abandon, them when they come face-to-face with competing values? What kinds of pressure - informational, normative, social or ideological, impose the greatest strain on the commitment of citizens to democratic values? For whom? And why? And with what consequences for the practice of democratic politics? The study that we propose is designed to break new ground in understanding when citizens, in France or elsewhere, stand by or forsake democratic principles under the pressure of competing values or in the face of an appeal to authority - including the authority of the popular will. To make this possible, we have partnerships with the Centre d'Etude de la Vie Politique Francaise (CEVIPOF) in Paris and the Institute d'Etude Politiques (CERIP) in Lyon. Each has a distinctive methodological expertise. The CEVIPOF group has been the leading survey research team in the study of electoral politics in France over the last two decades (Boy and Mayer, 1993; Boy and Mayer, 1997; Mayer, 1997). The CERIP group has been the principal forum for the study of the politics of ordinary citizens through close observation and intensive interviewing. Our group concentrates on marrying, through computer-assisted interviewing, the inferential strength of the randomized experiment with the descriptive strength of the representative sample. Working together, we can carry out a study that none of could accomplish on our own.