Three Views of Associationalism in 19th‐Century America: An Empirical Examination

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

This article examines three different theoretical conceptions of asso‐ciationalism with respect to cross‐sectional data on municipal expenditure and voter participation in American cities for the fiscal year 1880: a “neo‐Tocquevillian” perspective, which generally views as‐sociational activity as an alternative to government intervention; a “social movements” perspective, which views associations as interest groups mobilized to stimulate government action in areas germane to their specific pursuits; and a “social capital” perspective, which is neutral with respect to the impact of associationalism on the size of government but views associational activity as a stimulus to greater political participation. The analysis provides little support for the social capital and neo‐Tocquevillian perspectives but strong support for the social movements notion that one of the predominant political influences of associationalism, at least in late 19th‐century American cities, was that of interest group mobilization in support of specific municipal appropriations and party platforms.