According to Daniel Elazar, political culture in Texas is a composite of traditionalistic and individualistic elements. The traditionalistic aspects of state politics are indicated by the long history of one party dominance in state politics, economic and social conservatism and the low level of voter turnout. While the individualistic of state politics will be seen in the support for private business, faith in individual initiative and opposition to big government.
Today, there is an issue related to Conservative moralistic political culture in Texas. You may ever see this question on some platform. Lots of people who ask this question. Apparently, this problem has been solved. Let us break it out.
Conservative moralistic political culture in Texas. . .
- is able to be traced back to the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 1600s.
- is able to be traced back to the Spanish Catholic missions in Texas in the 1700s.
- started with the spread of Pentecostalism and Christian Fundamentalism in Texas in the late 18th century.
- began once evangelical Christianity gained favor in many of the mainline denominations in Texas in the late 20th century.
Based on the research, the answer is ‘D’, Conservative moralistic political culture in Texas began once evangelical Christianity gained favor in many of the mainline denominations in Texas in the late 20th century.
MORALISTIC POLITICAL CULTURE
In the framework of Daniel Elazar, the states with a moralistic political culture look at the government as a means to better society and promote the general welfare. They hope political officials to be honest in their dealings with others, position the interests of the people they serve above their own, and perform to improve the area which they represent. The process of politics is seen in a positive light. It is not a vehicle tainted by corruption. Actually, the citizens in moralistic cultures own little patience for corruption and trust that politicians must be motivated by a desire to benefit the community rather than by a need to profit financially from service.
Thus, Moralistic states tend to support an expanded role for the government. They are more likely to trust the government to promote the general welfare by allocating funds to programs that are going to benefit the poor. Additionally, they view it as the duty of public officials to advocate for the new programs that are going to benefit marginal citizens or fix public policy problems, even once public pressure to do so is nonexistent.
Apparently, the moralistic political culture developed among the Puritans in upper New England. After some generations, those settlers moved westward, and their values diffused across the top of the United States to the upper Great Lakes. In the middle of the 1800s, Scandinavians and Northern Europeans joined the group of settlers and reinforced the Puritans’ values. Those groups together pushed further west through the northern portion of the Midwest and West and then along the West Coast.
The states that identify with this moralistic culture appreciate the citizen engagement and desire the citizen participation in all forms of political affairs. In Daniel Elazar’s model, the citizens from moralistic states must be more likely to donate their time and resources to political campaigns and to vote. This happens for two primary reasons. The first reason, state law is likely to create it easier for the residents to register and to vote as mass participation is valued. The second reason, the citizens who hail from moralistic states must be more likely to vote as the elections are truly contested. In other words, the candidates are going to be less likely to run unopposed and more likely to face genuine competition from a qualified opponent. According to Daniel, increased competition is a function of the individual’s belief that public service is a worthwhile endeavor and a respectable profession.
INDIVIDUALISTIC POLITICAL CULTURE
The States that align with individualistic political culture view the government as a mechanism for solving problems that matter to individual citizens and for pursuing individual goals. People in this individualistic culture interact with the government in the same manner like they interact with a marketplace. They hope the government provides goods and services they admire as essential, and the public officials and bureaucrats who give them expect to be compensated for their efforts. The focus is on meeting individual needs. The private aims rather than on serving the best interests of everyone in the community. New policies are going to be enacted if politicians are able to use them to garner support from voters or other interested stakeholders, or if there is great demand for these services on the part of individuals.
Daniel Elazar stated that the individualist political culture originated with the settlers from non Puritan England and Germany. The first settlements were in the middle Atlantic region of New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey and diffused into the middle portion of the United States in a fairly straight line from Ohio to Wyoming.
Finally, Daniel E argues that in individualistic states, the electoral competition does not seek to identify the candidate with the best ideas. Instead, against each other political parties which are well organized and compete for votes directly. The voters are loyal to the candidates who hold the same party affiliation they do. As a result, unlike the case in moralistic cultures, the voters do not pay much attention to the personalities of the candidates once deciding how to vote and are less tolerant of third-party candidates.
TRADITIONALISTIC POLITICAL CULTURE
While moralistic cultures expect and encourage political participation by all citizens, the traditionalistic cultures are more likely to view it as a privilege reserved for only those who meet the qualifications. As a result, the voter participation is going to be lower in a traditionalistic culture, and there will be more barriers to participation. Conservatives argue that those laws reduce or eliminate fraud on the part of voters, while liberals believe that they disproportionately disenfranchise the poor and minorities and constitute a modern-day poll tax. Finally, under a traditionalistic political culture, Daniel argues that party competition is going to tend to occur between factions within a dominant party. Currently, depending on the office being sought, the parties are more likely to compete for the voters.