Posted at 10.04.2018
Seymour M. Lipset's book Continental Split (1990) consists of his analysis of how Canadian and American societies differ from each other in conditions of values, ideologies, and cultural companies. For purposes of the essay, I reviewed and analyzed Seymour M. Lipset's publication Continental Split (1990) which contains his analysis of how Canadian and American societies change from one another in conditions of prices, ideologies, and public establishments. Seymour Martin Lipset's highly acclaimed work explores the distinctive personality of American and Canadian values and organizations. Lipset draws materials from a number of resources: historical accounts, critical interpretations of artwork, aggregate figures and review data, as well as studies of law, religion and authorities. Drawing a vivid portrait of the two countries, Continental Divide represents among the better comparative communal and political research available.
In the contemporary society characterized by free trade, modernization and considerable affects from globalization, there still are major historical and parallel developments in the ethnicities of two countries that occupy the northern area of the Northern American continent. This factor provides the basis which Lipset uses to get essential and valuable comparisons of the civilizations in the two countries. On top of that, it empowered him to identify the reason why that describe the living of cultural gaps between the geographical and historical lovers. The cultures of the two societies can be differentiated predicated on organizational principles. For instance, Canada has been and continues to be known to be a society seen as a elitist, statist, class-aware, law-abiding and group-oriented individuals when compared with the United States (Lipset, 1990). Lipset uses cultural, political, and social corporations to analyse and discuss the distinctions in cultures between the two nations. The resources used to sketch referrals and illuminate similarities and differences include but are not limited to operate unions, social stratification, religion, regulation, multiculturalism and sociable deviance. In order to support his arguments that indeed there are major similarities in social differences among both nations, Lipset draws recommendations from diverse supplementary sources that include public thoughts and opinions polls, census data, and literary criticisms to bring illustrations in the way where such dissimilarities in cultures and organizational principles are portrayed. The distinctions are also observed in the patterns of intellectual thoughts, mass behaviour, behaviour and institutional agreements.
For a long time, tensions have existed in neuro-scientific political science with respect to the functions of comparative studies against sole country studies. In his book, Continental Divide, Lipset Martin Seymour tries to determine a systematic assessment of Canada and america. Notably, he postulates a comparative point of view is the most effective and effective way to review a country where a person belongs. Actually, the whole book can be an interpretative essay that is based on the foundations of existing research results and data from the views of the general public. The data can be used to describe the options and the nature of the prevailing differences and ethnic diversities and because of this; he establishes the reasons that have led to the differing paths of cultural advancements between Canada and the United States despite them being close neighbours.
Lipset is quick to argue that even though the cultures between the Canadian and American societies may show outward similarities (English Canadians, fashion, mode of living, urban framework), the foundations of the Canadian and American societies are incredibly different (Lipset, 1990). Admittedly, both countries existed as a result of American Trend but unequivocally their ethnicities followed dissimilar pathways to develop to what they are. For instance, the American culture upheld the prices submit by the North american Trend such as 'liberty, life, and quest for enjoyment' whereas the Canadian contemporary society affirmed to the counter-revolutionary ideals based on 'calmness, order, and good governance (Lipset, 1990). This confirms that the Canadian modern culture defined itself by following the opposite direction when compared with america. The American Trend and the war on independence once and for all designated the rebellious grounds of the American personality while it offered the Canadians a counter-top revolutionary character. Despite the fact that two ages have passed because the American Revolution as well as the coming and heading of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, the civilizations of both countries remain defined by habits submit by their founders.
Socially, the Canadian society accepted those people who opposed the American Trend, and instead preferred the principles afforded by the monarchical system of governance. Since the Revolution, 200 years back, both the Canadian and American societies have been subject to several changes in conditions of cultural development. Nevertheless, the societies in both countries have not converged in terms of culture despite the changes as a result of the changing environment and chances are unlikely that they will do so. Oddly enough, I ask yourself how is possible that the separation of Canada from America didn't change the ability of English Canadians to revive the disparities which exist amongst themselves with regards to the Us citizens. This opportunity is a hard task to clarify using the ideologies within the existing system (Bush, 1991).
The main aim of using Lipset's Continental Divide is to enable students and other people who are interested in the study of American politics to understand why there are dissimilarities in the North american and Canadian cultures despite the two societies having similar root base of origin. Indeed, Lipset not only practices a systematic way to establish comparisons between your two cultures but also uses an eminently clear perspective to describe the factors that lead to the existence of diverse routines, values, and institutions in both countries. This criterion of building differences between your two countries as opposed to using a single-country study enables him to make easier and clear comparisons of cultures in the two countries (Spencer, 1992).
Politically, Lipset uses foundations from his early on work, The First New Land and other literary materials that make clear the lack of socialism in the American Culture to trace the origins of the roots of the American politics culture back again to the eighteenth hundred years. Relating to his studies, it is visible that the political culture of the People in america is not static but instead modifies itself by embracing ideals brought about by social and monetary interventionism. This includes the perspectives of protection under the law groups and the New Deal of entitlements in recent decades. Despite the presence of such significant changes, Lipset asserts that politics changes can be seen in varying electoral and constitutional systems which may have formed the basis for protests and consensual politics in each particular country (Lipset, 1990).
Culturally, days gone by Canadian Heritage continues to be noticeable in the modern day society. This is still in the collective and group-oriented nature of the American modern culture rather than following a traditional, liberal, and individualistic character that is predominant in the American culture (Bush, 1991).
Limitations of the Study
According to Brym and Lie (2009), Continental Divide fails occasionally despite providing explanations and valid illustrations of how the Canadian society differs from the American modern culture. Lipset's visions appear to be centered in describing how Canada has been and exactly how it will continually be in conditions of an extremely centralized country that gives focus on the realization of the interpersonal vision of peace and tranquility. Matthews (1991) argues that the comparability of the ethnical societies in the two countries fails to give enough information on the importance of the Quebec world in Canada despite its linkage to the American continent. The analysis will not give credit to the fact that students in both United States and Canadian systems could have benefit a lot if Lipset's review included evidences to show that Canada is not a nation build using one dimension perspectives and this it has more that the limited English-Canadian version (Matthews, 1991). Furthermore, Lipset's comparison of the two societies presents the written text to seem like a family squabble if seen from the point of view of the outsiders such as European followers. In Continental Separate, Canada is portrayed to be a variation predicated on an American theme invested with French origins. Canada is identified in a manner that to claim that it is just a by-product of the North american Trend because no external references are pointed out apart from the few cases of immigration.
Ideologically, Lipset's arguments do not include accounts of the relationships that occurred between the two countries, a factor that leaves little room for the explanation of how international insurance policies should be cured. Sadly, the Lipset's book does neither discuss efforts by the Quebec's Lobby in Washington nor will it give detailed accounts of times when Canada attemptedto defend its ideals against those submit by the United States (Marien 1991). I feel that Lipset should have used a strategy that extends to explain means of working with Canadian antagonisms to the United State governments' exceptionalism. Alternatively, it fails to explain ways that French Canadian's and French-English interactions have added in shaping the sociable structures and social prices of the Canadian society although he uses data from these groups to draw differences and disparities in cultures between the two countries. This can evidenced when Lipset compared the privatized health care system of america to compare Canadian nationalized healthcare system. During this comparison, Lipset commonly accepted that the elite and public viewpoints are from the Canadian airfare of loyalists through the American Revolution.
Lipset's Continental Split succeeds excellently in illustrating the ways in which Canadian Cultures differ from the American culture. Generally, the text is well organized, persuasive, and impressive coupled with aiding data and information that superbly explains the Canadian modern culture. It provides a very good starting place to be used by interested students in the analysis of Canadian and American cultures. Admittedly, both countries existed because of the American Revolution but unequivocally their ethnicities followed dissimilar pathways to develop to what they are currently. Despite, few limitations which may have cited in the research of the text, Lipset succeeds in showing a detailed research of institutional differences and ethnical contrasts between the Canadian individuality and American ideologies (Wilson, n. d).
Undeniably, Lipset not only comes after a methodical way to determine comparisons between the two civilizations but also uses an eminently clear perspective to make clear the factors that lead to the lifetime of diverse tactics, values, and organizations in both countries. He gives detailed and structuralist accounts of the American-Canadian dissimilarities and the principles that have added to the convergence of the Canadian and American Societies. Indeed, the cross-national variations and evaluations of comparisons in culture have proved that cultural differences still exist between the Canadian and American world regardless of the countries being close neighbours.