The University of Chicago the New

The University of Chicago the New

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO THE NEW ENGLAND TOWN MEETING AS ICON AND ETHNOGRAPHIC OBJECT: NEW PERSPECTIVES ON PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY BY AVERILL J. LESLIE CHICAGO, ILLINOIS AUGUST 2018 Copyright © 2018 by Averill J. Leslie All rights reserved. With gratitude to everyone in “Northmont” who helped, took interest, or accepted or befriended me. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF SIDEBARS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vi LIST OF FIGURES -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vii ABSTRACT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- x INTRODUCTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 CHAPTER 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 75 “Almost Unnoticed as a Palladium of Liberty”: The 19th Century Invention of Town Meeting as an American Political Icon CHAPTER 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 127 The Ballad of Walter: Northmont’s Ballot Box as a Trust and Unity Machine APPENDIX --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 174 Alternative Explanations CHAPTER 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 184 Valorized, Vigorous, and… Sidelined? The Anti-Politics of Town Meeting Democracy in a Free-Market Age iv CHAPTER 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 241 Town Meetings Are Not Direct Democracy: Representative Democracy as Participatory Democracy APPENDIX A ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 290 Coding Categories APPENDIX B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 293 The Current Golden Age CHAPTER 5 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 320 Town Meeting’s “Abysmal” Attendance: A Cautionary Tale for Empirical Assessment of Participatory and Deliberative Institutions APPENDIX A ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 375 Kinky Empiricism in the Growth of the Turnout Trope APPENDIX B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 400 Ethnography of a Debate: Defenses of Town Meeting’s Turnout APPENDIX C ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 422 Literature Review: Prior Research on Town Meeting Turnout CONCLUSION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 433 Stereotypes, Participatory Democracy, and Participant Observation: A Reflection on Method WORKS CITED ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 441 v LIST OF SIDEBARS Sidebar 1 Town Meeting’s Meaning in American Culture ------------------------------------------ 8 Sidebar 2 Town Meeting’s Circulation Abroad: Three Vignettes --------------------------------- 27 Sidebar 3 Two Hundred Years of Complaints about Scholarly Inattention to Town Meeting --------------------------------------------------------------- 40 Sidebar 4 Town Meeting Beyond New England ----------------------------------------------------- 46 Sidebar 5 Northmont’s Many Boards and Officers -------------------------------------------------- 55 Sidebar 6 Why Jefferson Really Considered New England Towns “The Wisest Invention Ever Devised by the Wit of Man” ----------------------------- 90 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure 0.1 Three tacks for the anthropology of democracy ----------------------------------------- 25 Figure 0.2 Prevalence of town meetings in New England ------------------------------------------- 45 Figure 1.1 Timeline of New England city incorporations, 1784-1870 --------------------------- 115 Figure 1.2 Cumulative number of town halls constructed or acquired, 1775-1860 ------------ 118 Figure 2.1 Select Board Races since Northmont adopted a five-member board --------------- 134 Figure 2.2 Length of Select Board candidates’ floor speeches, 2009-2016 --------------------- 141 Figure 2.3 Vote shares of the 2016 Select Board candidates -------------------------------------- 167 Figure 2.4 Loss margins in Walter’s seven races --------------------------------------------------- 168 Figure 2.5 Northmonters’ voting patterns for President, 1976-2016 ----------------------------- 178 Figure 2.6 Northmonters’ voting patterns for Governor, 1976-2016 ---------------------------- 178 Figure 2.7 Northmonters’ voting patterns for State Representative, 1986-2016 --------------- 179 Figure 2.8 Ratio of Northmonters’ votes for liberal to conservative candidates, 1976-2016 - 179 Figure 2.9 Conflicting cabal theories ----------------------------------------------------------------- 182 Figure 4.1 Northmont’s town meeting warning from 2010 --------------------------------------- 249 Figure 4.2 Distribution of meeting time: discussion vs. other ------------------------------------ 260 Figure 4.3 Distribution of meeting time: actual discussion vs. proceduralisms ---------------- 262 Figure 4.4 Distribution of meeting time: local governance vs. SIRs and community togetherness -------------------------------------------------- 263 Figure 4.5 Distribution of meeting time: breaking out <<OFFICER ENGAGEMENT>> --- 265 Figure 4.6 Distribution of meeting time: breaking out <<DUE DILIGENCE>> -------------- 267 Figure 4.7 Distribution of meeting time: breaking out <<SETTLING>> ----------------------- 269 Figure 4.8 Distribution of meeting time: full breakout, including <<AMENDMENTS>> and <<CREATIVITY>> ------------------------- 271 Figure 4.9 Amendments at Northmont’s 2010-2014 town meetings ----------------------------- 273 Figure 4.10 Distribution of meeting time, by year and in aggregate ------------------------------ 277 Figure 4.11 Northmont’s town meeting warning from 1895 --------------------------------------- 298 Figure 4.12 Simulated table of contents for the 1895 Town Report ------------------------------- 302 Figure 4.13 Date-ordered expenditure recording ----------------------------------------------------- 307 Figure 4.14 The persistence of detailed reporting (an example from 2001) ---------------------- 308 Figure 4.15 2015 “State of the Town” report by the Northmont Select Board ------------------- 314 vii Figure 5.1 Studies of turnout in ballot municipalities ---------------------------------------------- 328 Figure 5.2 Illustration of how different units impact benchmarking ----------------------------- 331 Figure 5.3a RV vs. VAP vs. cVAP vs. VEP population, Vermont -------------------------------- 334 Figure 5.3b RV vs. VAP vs. cVAP vs. VEP population, California ------------------------------- 334 Figure 5.3c RV vs. VAP vs. cVAP vs. VEP population, United States --------------------------- 335 Figure 5.4 Conversion multiples for the Figure 5.1 studies --------------------------------------- 335 Figure 5.5a Converted turnout figures (no adjustment to Hajnal and Lewis) -------------------- 336 Figure 5.5b Converted turnout figures, with adjusted figure for Hajnal and Lewis ------------- 336 Figure 5.6 Town meeting peak turnout as a percentage of each benchmark -------------------- 336 Figure 5.7 Comparison of different methods of measuring attendance -------------------------- 340 Figure 5.8 Incomplete ballots in Ward 1 in Burlington’s 2015 election ------------------------ 341 Figure 5.9a Attendee churn at Northmont’s 2015 meeting ----------------------------------------- 345 Figure 5.9b Attendee churn at Northmont’s 2016 meeting ----------------------------------------- 346 Figure 5.10 Cumulative vs. peak attendance in Northmont meetings, 2011-2016 -------------- 347 Figure 5.11 Bryan’s town meeting turnout finding, adjusted for churn --------------------------- 348 Figure 5.12 Town meeting turnout, accounting for participant churn, as a percentage of each benchmark --------------------------------------------- 348 Figure 5.13 Age breakdown of Northmont’s town meeting participants vs. age breakdown of Northmont’s population ---------------------------------------- 356 Figure 5.14 Direct vs. representative democracy and strong vs. weak participation: two separate axes -------------------------------------- 373 Figure 5.15 Zimmerman’s (1984) data on 1982 town meetings across New England ---------- 394 Figure 5.16 Distribution of RV:VAP ratios for the data points in the 2001-2013 Vermont Secretary of State data set -------------------------------- 403 Figure 5.17 Northmont’s average town meeting turnout, 2010-2016, in different units -------- 405 Figure 5.18 Findings from Zimmerman (1999), table ----------------------------------------------- 426 Figure 5.19 Findings from Zimmerman (1999), chart ----------------------------------------------- 426 Figure 5.20 Vermont town meeting turnout, 2009-2015 -------------------------------------------- 430 Figure 5.21 Findings from Mehlman (1973): Rhode Island turnout by town size, 1968-1972 432 viii ABSTRACT This dissertation uses a reexamination of the contemporary New England

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    505 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us