Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime and start saving today with fast, free delivery

Kindle
$15.66

Available instantly

Hardcover
$5.98

Paperback
$29.00

Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Returns

FREE delivery April 23 - 25 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35

Or fastest delivery Thursday, April 18

Select delivery location

Only 1 left in stock (more on the way).

$$29.00 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details

Ships from

Amazon.com

Ships from

Amazon.com

Sold by

Amazon.com

Sold by

Amazon.com

Returns

Eligible for Return, Refund or Replacement within 30 days of receipt

Returns

Eligible for Return, Refund or Replacement within 30 days of receipt

This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.

Read full return policy

Payment

Secure transaction

Payment

Secure transaction

We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more

Details

Add a gift receipt for easy returns

Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime

FREE delivery Monday, April 15 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35. Order within 2 hrs 31 mins

Select delivery location

Used: Very Good | Details

Sold by eCampus_

Fulfilled by Amazon

Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.

Other Sellers on Amazon

Added

Not added

$38.90
& FREE Shipping. Details

Sold by: Chiya Group

Image Unavailable

Image not available for
Color:

To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the author

Alton L. Abramowitz

Follow

The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy Paperback – January 25, 2011

by Alan I. Abramowitz (Author)

11

See all formats and editions

{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"$29.00","priceAmount":29.00,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"29","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"00","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"wLEq%2BSJ2borJZ%2BdH8N14O3sbKXz72UPEItqMfxcWKRnf5gyfWsx8XefrqRj8gWZOUOoTko3vJPFqI6DLlXTmP0aCwh6ecFAYizBTWi%2FQwnSLqGTMs9Pe%2BaZOCZV8AIkDE0Q3RrOxSjQ%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}, {"displayPrice":"$9.37","priceAmount":9.37,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"9","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"37","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"wLEq%2BSJ2borJZ%2BdH8N14O3sbKXz72UPEKSy4Sse1ngYdK57QqqeeNaZkrKCoUzdQlETpPHjLjFiM5aNyhbceNqCrseIgM%2FpPhbai6xJqHdly5oc5ZN2wbxFwVFklRVFspYxqWU3O9WRI18%2BwH2uhjpM6k9%2Fx20TYxDiPBpRVYn88b6NCU6%2B2bVuvGnTf%2B5E5","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"USED","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":1}]}

Purchase options and add-ons

Renowned political scientist Alan I. Abramowitz presents a groundbreaking argument that the most important divide in American politics is not between left and right but rather between citizens who are politically engaged and those who are not. It is the engaged members of the public, he argues, who most closely reflect the ideals of democratic citizenship—but this is also the group that is most polarized. Polarization at the highest levels of government, therefore, is not a sign of elites’ disconnection from the public but rather of their responsiveness to the more politically engaged parts of it. Though polarization is often assumed to be detrimental to democracy, Abramowitz concludes that by presenting voters with clear choices, polarization can serve to increase the public’s interest and participation in politics and strengthen electoral accountability.

Print length

208 pages
Language

English
Publisher

Yale University Press
Publication date

January 25, 2011
Dimensions

5.88 x 0.53 x 8.92 inches
ISBN-10

0300168292
ISBN-13

978-0300168297
See all details

Frequently bought together

The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy

$29.00

Get it as soon as Thursday, Apr 18

Only 1 left in stock (more on the way).

Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

+

Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity

$23.00

Get it Apr 18 - 19

Only 9 left in stock - order soon.

Ships from and sold by textbooks_source.

Total price:

To see our price, add these items to your cart.

Try again!

Details

Added to Cart

One of these items ships sooner than the other.

Show details Hide details

Choose items to buy together.

Lilliana Mason
228
Paperback
40 offers from $16.04
Morris P. Fiorina
63
Paperback
42 offers from $1.98
Nolan McCarty
19
Paperback
61 offers from $2.19
Nolan McCarty
9
Paperback
20 offers from $4.98
Frances E. Lee
26
Paperback
36 offers from $9.20
Matthew Levendusky
8
Paperback
35 offers from $3.81

Editorial Reviews

Review

“Alan Abramowitz has produced a definitive work on the consequences of a divided electorate in elections, in policy making, and in the capacity for winners to govern. The Disappearing Center is a major contribution to the study of contemporary American politics.”―Thomas Edsall, author of Building Red America and Chain Reaction

-- Thomas Byrne Edsall

“No one is better at analyzing the American voter than Alan Abramowitz. In this exceptionally revealing volume, Professor Abramowitz convincingly explains one of the most discussed phenomena of our time, political polarization.”―Larry J. Sabato, author of A More Perfect Constitution

-- Larry J. Sabato

"Alan Abramowitz explains the most pressing political problem of the day―how Americans have grown so politically divided that they barely speak the same language."―Bill Bishop, author of The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart

-- Bill Bishop

"If you’re interested in getting beyond the standard handwringing and calls for bipartisanship, read this exceptionally clear and well-argued book.”―Ruy Teixeira, co-author of The Emerging Democratic Majority

-- Ruy Teixeira

"Among all the academics who write on American politics, Abramowitz is one of the most original, interesting, and convincing, and one of the smartest....[he] has new things to say about polarization. His focus here on the engaged versus the unengaged is a nice move. Also, he organizes recognized material about the subject in a way that beats the competition.”―David Mayhew, Yale University

-- David Mayhew Published On: 2010-02-25

“Thought-provoking.”--Publishers Weekly

― Publishers Weekly

"[An] important and persuasive new book."--Ethan Porter, Wilson Quarterly
-- Ethan Porter ― Wilson Quarterly

"Abramowitz admirably tackles many dimensions of a complex debate. . . . the book is an important text for both new and old students of polarization in American politics."—Hahrie Han, Public Opinion Quarterly -- Hahrie Han ― Public Opinion Quarterly

About the Author

Alan I. Abramowitz is the Alben W. Barkley Professor of Political Science at Emory University.

Product details

Publisher ‏ : ‎ Yale University Press; 12/26/10 edition (January 25, 2011)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Paperback ‏ : ‎ 208 pages
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0300168292
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0300168297
Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 10.4 ounces
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 5.88 x 0.53 x 8.92 inches

Best Sellers Rank: #2,311,155 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #916 in Political Advocacy Books
- #1,567 in Political Parties (Books)
- #2,429 in Elections

Customer Reviews:
11

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Videos

Help others learn more about this product by uploading a video!

Upload your video

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.

Alton L. Abramowitz

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Customer reviews

4.6 out of 5

11 global ratings

2 star

0%

1 star

0%

How customer reviews and ratings work

Sort reviews by

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Paul R. Abramson

polisciman

Reviewed in the United States on May 11, 2010

Verified Purchase

Alan Abramowitz is a first-rate scholar, and has provided an outstanding explanation for the high level polarization among political elites. This is an important book that should be read by knowledgeable citizens, not just specialists in political science.

7 people found this helpful

Helpful

Michael Charney

Thorough and engaging analysis

Reviewed in the United States on March 19, 2012

Verified Purchase

There are untold "analyses" of our current politically polarized environment, but most are no more than polemics based on preconceived ideas populated by cherry-picked data disguised as the truth. Abramowitz's book is very different. Working from the data outwards, Abramowitz reminds us that Political Science includes the word "science." In chapter after chapter he weeds through a never-ending stream of statistics in order to weed out the real from the imagined, and, in the process, comes to some frightening conclusions.

In writing my own book, I found similar results, though far more anecdotal, based, as they were, on my own experiment.

What I would have liked to see a bit more of was Abramowitz himself; why was he interested in this topic? What does he think his findings portend? Does he think that a disappearing center is a good thing?

2 people found this helpful

Helpful

No Name

Everything in balance, including the lack of balance

Reviewed in the United States on April 17, 2014

Verified Purchase

I suggest reading this and the polarization myth and making your own decisions. Clearly, presidential sample size is small, so take it with a grain of salt. Makes some very salient points.

One person found this helpful

Helpful

Louloubedoo

Going, Going, Gone?

Reviewed in the United States on March 26, 2011

That our politics are now deeply polarized is a well-known fact. But do the polarized politics in Washington reflect the deep divides in the country between red and blue voters (and their respective desires for increasingly opposite policies on both sides)? Or do these elite divisions exist in spite of an essentially purple, moderate America?

Alan Abramowitz, a professor of political science at Emory University, is on the side of Washington as mirror of a deeply fractured electorate rapidly losing its political middle. His new book, "The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy" is the story of how voters migrated to the extremes over the last five decades.

Essentially, four big, interlinked things happened. The first is that the parties "sorted" better. The second is that the number of safe districts and safe states increased. The third is that Americans as a whole became more educated. The fourth is that the engagement gap between strong partisans and political moderates widened.

In their 1960 plumage, Republicans and Democrats were both diverse species, loose-fitting labels that meant very different things depending on where you were from. Northern "liberal" Republicans and Southern "conservative" Democrats made up large minority factions, and both often found more common cause with their fellow "liberals" or "conservatives" across the aisle than their fellow partisans. In such an environment, bipartisanship was the norm, rather than the exception.

Then the tumultuous `60s shook the snow globe of American politics. The fight over civil rights broke the Democrats' hold on the "Solid South," turning Southern Democrats into Republicans. The Republican center of gravity gradually migrated deep below the Mason-Dixon line, taking on a much redder hue: much more socially conservative, more skeptical of government. Democrats, meanwhile, freed from the need to keep placate the conservative southerners, grew bluer: more socially liberal, and less skeptical of government.

Once upon a time, congressional districts were highly competitive, and a Democrat (or Republican) had to be sensitive to the concerns of voters in the competing party to maintain a seat. Even as late as the 95th Congress (1977-1978), only 24 percent of Democrats and 27 percent of Republicans were in "safe" districts; By the 108th Congress (2004-2005), 49 percent of Democrats and 40 percent of Republicans were in "safe" districts. The consequence: they were far more likely to be worried about fending off extreme challengers in their primaries than about winning the general election by moving to the center. Thus, more extreme politicians replaced more moderate ones.

In 1976, the eight most populous states were all battleground states in the presidential election, and the average winning margin among them was 3.1 percentage points. In 2004, only four of the eight most populous states were battlegrounds, and the average winning margin in the eight states was 9.3 percentage points. Thanks to both realignment and demographic change, Abramowitz writes, "Red states, counties, and congressional districts have been getting redder while blue states, counties, and congressional districts have been getting bluer."

At the same time, the American public got a whole lot better educated. In 1956, 37 percent of Americans had only a grade school education, and just 19 percent had some college; in 2004, only three percent of Americans had just a grade school education, and 61 percent had at least some college.

This matters, Abramowitz argues, because "College-educated citizens are generally more interested in politics, more politically active, and better informed about candidates and issues than high school-educated citizens. This is especially true with regard to one important form of political engagement: ideological awareness."

So: the parties got better sorted into distinct camps, districts became less competitive, and an increasingly educated electorate was better able to pick up on the differences and to respond accordingly, sorting themselves likewise into the appropriate categories. Abramowitz notes that especially among the better educated, there has been increased "partisan-ideological polarization" - that is, that high-information liberals are indeed reliably liberal across all issues, and high-information conservatives are reliably conservative across all issues.

All of this polarization has actually been good for political engagement generally. Abramowitz cites numerous measures of a public that now cares more about politics, follows it more closely, and talks about it more to their friends - partly because they are more educated, and partly because if the parties are highly polarized, the stakes of political victory are significantly greater (high stakes are a terrific motivator.)

But, at the same time, a certain slice of the electorate has been left behind: "The American public appears to be increasingly divided into two groups," writes Abramowitz, "the politically engaged, who view politics in ideological terms, and the politically disengaged, who do not."

For example, 56 percent of strong liberal or conservatives reported being politically engaged in 2004, as compared to 36 percent of those who "lean" liberal or conservative, and just 20 percent of those who say they are moderate, or of no ideology. In the 1950s, this gap did not exist.

To Abramowitz, the story of the disengaged moderates is mostly a story about less-educated, less-engaged citizens who don't know or care enough about politics to pick a side. Were they to get wealthy and educated, like the partisans, they would presumably then know enough to pick one of the two distinct teams in American politics. But lacking the means or the will to pick a side, they call themselves moderate, feel disengaged and disenchanted by politics, and try to get on with the business of making a living.

On the descriptives, The Disappearing Center is a terrific compendium to what's happened. The parties have pulled apart, and in particular strong partisans on both sides are further apart than ever before. There are fewer competitive states, fewer competitive districts, and politicians who dare to compromise are increasingly punished. Nor is this likely to change: "A coalition of moderates is no longer possible because the center is a shrunken remnant of what it was forty or fifty years ago," concludes Abramowitz. The forecast is for more partisan rancor, far as the eye can see.

But the analysis lacks in a few areas. For one, Abramowitz doesn't engage with the possibility that political moderates have become less engaged out of frustration with extremism; his preferred explanation is that they remain moderate only out of an ignorance of the stakes involved. More frustratingly, his analysis is based heavily on reported self-identifications, rather than actual issue positions, and the issues he choose to measure polarization tend to be particular hot-button issues, like abortion and the Iraq war. More thorough issue-based measuring of public opinion (see, for example, Morris Fiorina's Disconnect, or Joseph Bafumi and Michael C. Herron's research on leapfrog representation) has found a much more moderate public on the issues, a public that has been left behind by two increasingly extreme parties.

19 people found this helpful

Helpful

Alan Hull

an interesting analysis with a strange conclusion

Reviewed in the United States on December 7, 2015

This interesting and useful book comes to a surprising conclusion based on an in-depth analysis of the 2004 and 2008 elections and several data sets about those elections and voting trends dating back into the mid 20th century. The author concludes that informed polarization between the right and the left serves democracy better than bipartisan compromise. The latter is seen by many in the electorate in 2015 as the most desirable way to accommodate differences and move progress forward, in spite of the fact that congressional gridlock and doubling down on dogmatic political positions has replaced bipartisanship. The flaw in the author's conclusion is that an informed if polarized electorate is by definition an engaged and educated electorate too. This may be true of the academic circles in which the author moves, and it is certainly the reputation that Emory University has where he works, but it is hardly a good description of the American electorate as a whole. As of the date of this review (late 2015) the undeniable popularity of an egotistical bigoted demagogue and profiteer like Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election is proof positive that most American voters are anti-intellectual, intolerant, "low information," non-participatory, poorly educated, self-interested and un-engaged with the political process. The polarization seen in American politics in 2015 may very well continue going forward but it will be because of flawed and out of control campaign finance laws, a profit-driven multinational news media culture that value conflict and emotionalism over logical thinking and rationality, and an iconoclastic, irrational and militaristic right wing base of voters who will be satisfied with nothing less than a return to the 1950's America of their Bible-jabbing, grizzled youth.

The book's strength is its use of a large number of simple and easy-to-use charts and graphs. Based on some of the author's comments about data collection methodology, the data on which these excellent graphics are based make this book a useful applications supplement for an undergraduate inferential statistics course. This data is also the source of one of the book's narrative flaws which is mind-numbing and hard-to-follow listing of quantitative information as text. Most of this detail could have been eliminated and replaced with simple summations of the trends, correlations and other points the author makes. It would also result in a considerable shortening of the book to dissertation (which is what this may be anyway), monograph or even journal-article length.

In summary, this interesting book does a good job of highlighting the Balkanization of American politics since the 1950's but it reaches the unexpected conclusion that this may be a good thing with the very significant (and totally unrealistic) qualifier that the electorate is educated, engaged and knowledgeable.

5 people found this helpful

Helpful

Return this item for free