Research Note: Incentives and the Maintenance of Political Styles in Different Locales

• Author: Peter R. Gluck
• DOI: 10.1177/106591297202500413
• Published date: 01 December 1972
• Date: 01 December 1972
• Subject Matter: Articles

RESEARCH NOTE: INCENTIVES AND THE
MAINTENANCE OF POLITICAL STYLES
IN DIFFERENT LOCALES
PETER R. GLUCK
University of Michigan, Flint
MGNG
the more generally accepted myths in the folklore of American history
and politics is the belief that there is a considerable difference in the life
jL
styles and politics of rural and urban America. With the great migration
from the cities to the suburbs, it has now become a question of whether the life style
and politics of suburban communities will approximate the urban life style and
politics more closely than the rural one. Of particular interest to the student of
politics is the question of the impact of a community’s life style upon its political
style. Banfield and Wilson, for example, contrast small-town politics with city poli-
tics by noting that the former emphasizes personal, face-to-face contacts, while the
latter impersonalizes politics by placing a variety of organizations between the indi-
vidual and the political system. Furthermore, town politics is seen as largely con-
sensus-oriented, while city politics is regarded as conflict-oriented.’ The importance
of the distinction between these two styles of politics is that they have considerable
consequences for a variety of functions performed in the political system.
One of the primary community variables believed to affect the style of politics
is the local party organization. The style of politics said to prevail in urban com-
munities has been labeled the &dquo;professional style&dquo; and coincides with a model of
local party organization based upon the research of Forthal, Gosnell, Kent, and
Salter.2
2
In this model the emphasis of the organization is upon the appeal of a
variety of self-oriented incentives, including tangible ones such as jobs, patronage,
and business contacts, and intangible ones such as social status and prestige, social
mobility, and community recognition. Activists and voters in urban party organiza-
tions appear to be unconcerned with the variety of other-oriented incentives, either
tangible or intangible, which politics offers to its partisans and participants Rather,
NOTE: My thanks to Professor Richard Styskal for his helpful comments on an earlier draft
of this paper.
1
Edward C. Banfield and James Q. Wilson, City Politics (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1963), pp. 24ff.
2
The classic studies of "machines" and the "professional" politician include: Sonya Forthal,
Cogwheels of Democracy: A Study of the Precinct Captains (New York: William-Fred-
erick Press, 1946) ; Harold F. Gosnell, Machine Politics: Chicago Model (Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 1937) ; Frank R. Kent, The Great Game of Politics (New York:
Doubleday Doran, 1923) ; and John T. Salter, Boss Rule: Portraits in City Politics (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1935). Among the more recent studies of urban party politics are :
Robert H. Salisbury, "The Urban Party Organization Member," Public Opinion Quar-
terly, 29 (Winter 1965-66) ; Dwaine Marvick and Charles R. Nixon, "Recruitment Con-
trasts in Rival Campaign Groups," in Marvick, ed., Political Decision-Makers (New
York: Free Press, 1961) ; and Dwaine Marvick, "The Middlemen of Politics," in William
J. Crotty, ed., Approaches to the Study of Party Organization (Boston: Allyn and Bacon,
1968).
3
The development of the classification of incentives to organizational participation can be
found in the author’s "Politics at the Grass-roots: The Inducements and Rewards of
Party Participation" (Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo,
1970), esp. chap. 2.
753

---

754
urban party activists and supporters see their role almost exclusively in terms of
mobilizing votes in order to secure or maintain control of the governmental machin-
ery. This, in turn, maximizes and insures the continued flow of tangible and intangi-
ble self-oriented incentives.
An alternative political style and model of local party organization is found
in the relatively recent studies conducted by Wilson, Hirschfield, Carney, and
others, This style of politics is called the &dquo;amateur style&dquo; and is found in party
organizations which emphasize the appeal of a variety of other-oriented incentives,
including tangible ones such as neighborhood improvement, and intangible ones
such as influencing policies and issues, changing the party structure and procedures,
and serving a perceived civic and community obligation. These activists are largely
unconcerned with the kinds of incentives which appeal to the professional politician
and perpetuate the professional style of politics. This is due in large part to the fact
that amateurs tend to rank higher than professionals on such socioeconomic attri-
butes as education, occupational status, and income. In short, the amateur comes
from a decidedly middle-class background, while the professional comes from a
decidedly working-class life style.5
IT
Wilson’s seminal study of amateur politics...