Difference between revisions of "Political machineries (USA)"

Second, the large-scale buying of votes and trading of material inducements for political support were reinforced by a massive influx of immigrants who (a) were dependent on local networks for support and mutual help; (b) were given the right to vote comparatively quickly; and (c) were willing, since they lacked a supportive welfare-state and experience of democratic processes, to trade their votes for more tangible benefits (food, housing and jobs).

Second, the large-scale buying of votes and trading of material inducements for political support were reinforced by a massive influx of immigrants who (a) were dependent on local networks for support and mutual help; (b) were given the right to vote comparatively quickly; and (c) were willing, since they lacked a supportive welfare-state and experience of democratic processes, to trade their votes for more tangible benefits (food, housing and jobs).

Third, immigration encouraged the extremely fast growth of urban centres and the need for massive investment in urban infrastructure. American cities, however, were not able centrally to coordinate such complex projects, mainly because the democratic structure of local administrations imposed strong checks and balances between administrative units. The resultant deadlocks in decision-making had to be solved informally and on a personal level.

Third, immigration encouraged the extremely fast growth of urban centres and the need for massive investment in urban infrastructure. American cities, however, were not able centrally to coordinate such complex projects, mainly because the democratic structure of local administrations imposed strong checks and balances between administrative units. The resultant deadlocks in decision-making had to be solved informally and on a personal level.