¹ Barritt, Denis P. and Carter, Charles F., The Northern Ireland Problem: A Study in Group Relations, 2nd edn. (London: Oxford University Press, 1972)Google Scholar; Budge, Ian and O'leary, Cornelius, Belfast: Approach to Crisis — A Study of Belfast Politics, 1613–1970 (London: Macmillan, 1973)Google ScholarO'brien, Conor Cruise, States of Ireland (London: Hutchinson, 1972)Google Scholar; De Paor, Liam, Divided Ulster, 2nd edn. (Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin Books, 1971)Google Scholar; Harris, Rosemary, Prejudice and Tolerance in Ulster: A Study of Neighbours and ‘Strangers’ in a Border Community (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1972)Google Scholar; Rose, Richard, Governing without Consensus: An Irish Perspective (London: Faber and Faber, 1971).Google Scholar

² Rokkan, Stein, Citizens, Elections, Parties: Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Processes of Development (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1970), p. 49.Google Scholar

³ The index of religious voting is here defined as the percentage of Protestants supporting the Unionists minus the percentage of Catholics supporting the Unionists, among respondents expressing a preference for the Unionists, the Nationalists, or the Northern Ireland Labour Party. Based on somewhat earlier surveys, the indices of religious voting in a few other countries with heterogeneous Protestant-Catholic populations areas follows: United States, +16; Great Britain, +7; West Germany, +29; The Netherlands, +50; Switzerland, +59; Australia, +14; and Canada, +21. See Alford, Robert R., Party and Society: the Anglo-American Democracies (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963), p. 91Google Scholar; and Lijphart, Arend, Class Voting and Religious Voting in the European Democracies: a Preliminary Report, Occasional Paper No. 8 (Glasgow: Survey Research Centre, University of Strathclyde, 1971), pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

⁴ In one place, Rose suggests a mixture of the first two perspectives as the correct interpretation: ‘Because Catholics see discord in nationality terms whereas Protestants see it in religious terms, politics in Northern Ireland involves ideologically unrelated conflicts’ (p. 216).

⁵ See Smith, M. G., ‘Some Developments in the Analytic Framework of Pluralism’, in Kuper, Leo and Smith, M.g., eds., Pluralism in Africa (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969), pp. 415–18.Google Scholar

⁶ Almond, Gabriel A., ‘Comparative Political Systems’, Journal of Politics, XVIII (1956), 391–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷ A considerable problem in this connection is that the term ‘culture’ can be defined in divergent ways. O'Brien, for example, speaks of the ‘cultural separateness’ of the religious groups in a sense that it is quite distinct from political attitudes (p. 15).

⁸ Hartz, Louis, The Founding of New Societies: Studies in the History of the United States, Latin America, South Africa, Canada and Australia (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1964), p. 3.Google Scholar

⁹ The exact definition is: ‘the sum of the differences between the proportions of each religion giving a particular response [divided] by two’ (pp. 200–1).

¹⁰ Juan J. Linz, ‘The Breakdown of Democratic Politics’ (paper delivered at the Seventh World Congress of the International Sociological Association in Varna, 1970).

¹¹ Duverger, Maurice, ‘The Development of Democracy in France’, in Ehrmann, Henry W., ed., Democracy in a Changing Society (New York: Praeger, 1964), p. 77.Google Scholar

¹² Eckstein, Harry, Division and Cohesion in Democracy: A Study of Norway (Princeton. N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1966), p. 234.Google Scholar

¹³ In order to measure the levels of cross-cutting, Rae and Taylor's index XC was used. See Rae, Douglas W. and Taylor, Michael, The Analysis of Political Cleavages (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970), pp. 85–113.Google Scholar

¹⁴ See Lijphart, , ‘Consociational Democracy’, World Politics, XXI (1969), 207–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Linz, ‘The Breakdown of Democratic Polities’.

¹⁶ See, for instance, Rosenau, James N., ed., Linkage Politics: Essays on the Convergence of National and International Systems (New York: Free Press, 1969).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Carter's, suggestion is not fully consociational, because instead of accepting the religiously based parties as the main partners in elite accommodation, he prefers ‘a quite new and non-sectarian structure of parties’ (p. 167).Google Scholar