Information and statistics about how a great part of the American public felt about certain issues concerning their life or the nation have not been available for very long. Even in the absence of data there have been vast speculations and reports by the news media on public opinion regarding specific policy decisions by the government. In the maiden decades of the republic policymakers and businessmen were always trying to grasp what the public mood was with respect to a particular event or decision. Yet due to the poorly developed infrastructure and lack of technological innovations at that time it was nearly impossible to find out what the thoughts of a larger part of the population were in a reasonable matter of time. The “scientific” public opinion polling that is taking for granted today is not that old. The American Institute of Public Opinion, more commonly known as the Gallup poll, came into existence in 1935 just in time for the 1936 presidential election between Roosevelt and Landon. The Literary Digest, just as the American Institute, attempted to predict the winner of the 1936 election with the data they collected during their research polling. In the end, the Gallup poll was more accurate and predicted with Franklin Roosevelt the correct winner of the election even though the survey was conducted with fewer respondents but with a much more representative selection. Had the Literary Digest been right in its analysis maybe today’s standard polling procedures would be somewhat different.A much older tradition in the history of the United States is the debate about the merits of public participation, majority rule and popular sovereignty. It is a debate as old as the nation about the definition of the proper role of public opinion on affairs of the national government. In this context the emphasis is especially on affairs of foreign policy, issues about military operations in particular.
Ole Holsti identifies the two traditions American thought which define both sides. On the one hand there is a long liberal tradition in the United States which characterizes public opinion as “a force for enlightenment and a necessary if not sufficient condition for sound foreign policy and thus a significant contributor to peaceful relations among nations.” On the other hand there is a long realist tradition which sees the public as a “source of emotional and shortsighted thinking that can only impede the effective pursuit and defense of vital national...
Table of Contents
1. Public Opinion Research
1.1 Origins of Public Opinion Polls
1.2 Does Public Opinion matter?
1.3 Public opinion in democracies at times of war
2. Theories about public support for war
2.1 Mueller’s casualty logarithm
2.2 The Rally-Round-The-Flag-Effect
2.3 Best case scenario: A quick and just war
3. Examples of public opinion on war
3.1 Korea
3.2 Vietnam
4. Who frames support for War?
4.1 The Elites
4.2 The Media
Objectives and Core Themes
This work examines the complex relationship between American public opinion and state-led military interventions, specifically questioning how and why support for war shifts over time. The primary research focus lies in analyzing the validity of casualty-based theories versus elite-led framing in explaining public approval during conflicts.
- Historical development and reliability of public opinion polling in democratic systems.
- Evaluation of the "casualty logarithm" theory by John Mueller.
- The influence of the "Rally-Round-The-Flag" effect on presidential approval during wartime.
- Comparative analysis of public sentiment during the Korean and Vietnam Wars.
- The role of political elites and media narratives in shaping mass perception.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1 Mueller’s casualty logarithm
Every analysis about public opinion on war has to begin with the introduction of John Mueller and his classical contribution to the research field of public opinion in the context of war. Although the more recent works done by sociologist have found weak spots in Mueller’s work and gradually shifted away from its central theme or improved his argument it has always been the first point of reference. Mueller analysed public support for the wars in Korea, Vietnam and the Gulf War which are exactly the same examples we will be looking at in chapter four. His research is so fundamental for any sociologist who is going to work on public opinion on war because Mueller seemed to have found a pattern which could serve to explain the rise and decline of public support for every war with American involvement. By comparing the Korean, the Vietnam, and the Gulf War he recognized the different developments during all three wars but was still able to identify a similar reaction to the wars by the public which seemingly connected them.
Mueller’s groundbreaking thesis involved the relation between the number of casualties the United States had to suffer during a conflict and the public’s opinion of the war. He concluded that although all three wars were developing very differently one similarity was that in all cases the public support for war declined over time. He attempted to find out why this was happening and why it was happening at different levels. Mueller reached the conclusion that the public support for wars could be related to the total number of American casualties that had been suffered at the time of the poll. The relation for Mueller was, that “in each war, support is projected to have started at much the same level, and then every time American casualties increased by a factor of 10, support for the war dropped by about 15 percentage points.” This argument assumes that the public is only sensitive to relatively small losses at the beginning of the war and rather large ones towards its end.
Summary of Chapters
1. Public Opinion Research: This chapter traces the origins of scientific polling and discusses the ideological debate within American traditions regarding whether public opinion is a beneficial guide or an emotional impediment to foreign policy.
2. Theories about public support for war: The chapter outlines core academic models, focusing on Mueller’s casualty-based thesis, the rally-round-the-flag effect, and the impact of expectations regarding the duration and justification of conflicts.
3. Examples of public opinion on war: This section empirically tests theoretical models against historical data from the Korean and Vietnam Wars, highlighting discrepancies in casualty sensitivity and support fluctuations.
4. Who frames support for War?: This chapter shifts the focus to the influence of political elites and the media in shaping public opinion, arguing that official rhetoric and crisis management often outweigh casualty numbers in sustaining support.
Keywords
Public Opinion, Foreign Policy, War Support, Mueller, Casualty Logarithm, Rally-Round-The-Flag, Vietnam War, Korean War, Political Elites, Media Influence, Popular Sovereignty, Democratic Governance, Framing, Casualties, Propaganda.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper explores the mechanisms behind American public support for military interventions and how that support is influenced, maintained, or eroded over the course of a conflict.
What are the central thematic areas covered?
The text focuses on public opinion research, theoretical models of wartime support, comparative historical analysis of specific wars, and the influence of elite and media framing.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine which factors—such as casualty counts or elite messaging—are the most significant drivers of public opinion during American wartime engagements.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The paper utilizes a qualitative literature review combined with the analysis of historical polling data, contrasting established sociological theories with critical academic perspectives.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body examines the history of polling, John Mueller’s casualty logarithm, the rally-round-the-flag effect, and the contrasting roles of government elites and media in influencing the public.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The work is defined by terms like public opinion, foreign policy, casualty sensitivity, political framing, and the historical comparative analysis of U.S. wars.
How does the Vietnam War challenge existing theories?
The Vietnam War serves as a complex case study where traditional rally-round-the-flag patterns were inconsistent, suggesting that public opinion is more nuanced and influenced by specific political events than simple models predict.
Why is the role of elites considered significant by the author?
The author highlights that elites, particularly the President, play a crucial role in framing the mission; support often depends on the public's perception of whether the leadership remains committed and confident in the operation.
- Quote paper
- Michael Schmid (Author), 2005, The Just Cause: How the American Public supports War, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/72831
