Abstract
Specialists on U.S. public opinion and foreign policy have rejected the Almond-Lippmann consensus, which implied public attitudes were dangerously erratic, and have moved in varying degrees toward a view of public opinion as rational. Consensus on this new view would be premature. The revisionists have not yet addressed all elements of the traditional critique of the American public. In particular, they have overlooked the thesis of postwar foreign policy realists that the public reacts to foreign threats too slowly and then too strongly. This article presents a preliminary test of the classical realist hypotheses, through an analysis of public opinion on military spending from 1965 to 1991. On balance, the results favor the rational public perspective. Some caveats, however, suggest the need for further research before the traditional, negative view of the public should be rejected.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
