¹ See, for example, Berelson, Bernard R. et al. , Voting (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1954), pp. 55–56Google Scholar; Campbell, Angus et al. , The American Voter (New York, Wiley, 1960), pp. 333Google Scholar ff.; Alford, Robert R., Party and Society (Chicago, Rand McNally, 1963).Google Scholar

² George Lichtheim argues for the applicability of Marxian categories in “Class and Hierarchy: A Critique of Marx?”, Archives Européennes de Sociologie, tome 5, numéro 1 (1964), pp. 101–112. Changes in industrial society that make Marx appear less relevant are discussed in Dahrendorf, Ralf, Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society (Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1959), pp. 36–71Google Scholar; Schumpeter, Joseph, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (New York, Harper and Row, 1962), pp. 59 ff.Google Scholar

³ See, for example, Lipset, Seymour Martin, “The Changing Class Structure and Contemporary European Politics”, Daedalus, vol. 93 (Winter, 1964), pp. 271–303Google Scholar, and Lane, Robert E., “The Politics of Consensus in an Age of Affluence”, American Political Science Review, vol. LIX, no. 4 (12 1965), pp. 875–894.Google Scholar

⁴ For a discussion of these issues see Janowitz, Morris and Segal, David R., “Social Cleavage and Party Affiliation”, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 72, no. 6 (05, 1967), pp. 601–618.Google Scholar

⁵ These issues are discussed by Dahrendorf, , op. cit., pp. 241Google Scholar ff.; Schumpeter, , op. cit., pp. 72Google Scholar ff.; Berle, A. A. and Means, Gardner, The Modern Corporation and Private Property (New York, Macmillan, 1933)Google Scholar; Talcott Parsons and Smelser, Neil J., Economy and Society (New York, Free Press, 1965), pp. 252–255Google Scholar; Bendix, Reinhard, Work and Authority in Industry (New York, Harper and Row, 1963)Google Scholar; Djilas, Milovan, The New Class (New York, Praeger, 1957).Google Scholar

⁶ See, for example, Lipset, Seymour Martin and Bendix, Reinhard, Social Mobility in Industrial Society (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1960), p. 178.Google Scholar

⁷ See, for example, Hoffman, Stanley, Le Mouvement Poujade (Paris, Colin, 1956).Google Scholar

⁸ The current dialogue between the Catholic Church and leading Communist theoreticians in Western Europe is indicative of the willingness of neo-Marxists to accept theology as something other than class-based ideology. See Garaudy, Roger, From Anathema to Dialogue (New York, Herder and Herder, 1966).Google Scholar

⁹ Weber, Max, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Part III, Chapter 4, p. 635.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Hodge, Robert W., Siegel, Paul M. and Rossi, Peter H., “Occupational Prestige in the United States: 1925–1963,” in Bendix, Reinhard and Lipset, Seymour Martin, eds., Class, Status and Power, second edition (New York, Free Press, 1966), pp. 322–334.Google Scholar

¹¹ Robert W. Hodge, Donald J. Treiman and Peter H. Rossi, “A Comparative Study of Occupational Prestige”, in Bendix, and Lipset, , op. cit., pp. 309–321.Google Scholar

¹² Dahrendorf, , op. cit., p. 76.Google Scholar

¹³ The German data were collected by the Institut für angewandte Sozialwissenschaft (Infas) between January, 1963 and April, 1964. The American data were collected by the Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, and were made available through the Inter-University Consortium for Political Research.

¹⁴ See Morris Janowitz, Klaus Liepelt and David R. Segal, “An Approach to the Comparative Analysis of Political Partisanship”, paper given at the Sixth World Congress of Sociology, Evian, France, September, 1966.

¹⁵ For a discussion of German feudalism, see Bloch, Marc, Feudal Society, trans, by Manyon, L. A. (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1964), vol. 1, pp. 179 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁶ See Jackson T. Main, “The Class Structure of Revolutionary America”, in Bendix, and Lipset, , op. cit., pp. 111–121.Google Scholar

¹⁷ See Wilensky, Harold L. and Lebeaux, Charles N., Industrial Society and Social Welfare (New York, Free Press, 1965), pp. 93 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁸ For insightful if unorthodox analyses of the revolt against the Church and feudal nobility in Germany see Erikson, Erik H., Young Man Luther (New York, W. W. Norton, 1962), pp. 234–287Google Scholar, and Engels, Frederick, The Peasant War in Germany (Moscow, Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1956). Note that although the conversion of German peasants to Protestantism can be viewed as a class-struggle phenomenon, there was a significant degree of conversion among the nobility as well which resulted in part in the Schmalkaldic War against Charles V, resolved by the Religious Peace of Augsburg in 1555.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See Janowitz, Morris, “Social Stratification and Mobility in West Germany”, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 64, no. 1 (07, 1958), pp. 10–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ See Lipset's, Seymour Martin metaphorical chronology, The First New Nation (New York, Basic Books, 1963), pp. 79–82.Google Scholar

²¹ Janowitz, Liepelt and Segal, op. cit.

²² See, for example, Dahl, Robert A., Who Governs (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1961), p. 39.Google Scholar

²³ See McNeill, William H., The Rise of the West (New York, Mentor, 1965), pp. 806 ff.Google Scholar

²⁴ See Lipset, , The First New Nation, pp. 170–204.Google Scholar

²⁵ See Bell, Daniel, The End of Ideology (New York, Collier Books, 1962), Ch. 12, “The Failure of American Socialism”.Google Scholar

²⁶ Kornhauser, Arthur, Sheppard, Harold L. and Mayer, Albert J., When Labor Votes (New York, University Books, 1956).Google Scholar

²⁷ David R. Segal and Richard Shaffner, “Class, Party and the American Negro” (forthcoming).

²⁸ “The benefits of large numbers and broadly based coverage proved to be greater than the benefits of timeliness”, Ithiel de Sola Pool, Abelson, Robert P. and Popkin, Samuel L., Candidates, Issues and Strategies (Cambridge, M.I.T. Press, 1964), pp. 65–67.Google Scholar

²⁹ We are grateful to the Inter-University Consortium for Political Research for making these data available to us. The analysis of the American data was carried out at the Computing Center, University of Michigan. We are indebted to Allen J. Rubin for his efficient handling of these data.

³⁰ Seegers, J. H. G., “De Contrastgroepen-Methode: Nadere Uitwerking en een Tweetal Toepassingen”, Sociale Wetenschappen, no. 3, 1964, pp. 194–225.Google Scholar

³¹ Sonquist, John A. and Morgan, James N., The Detection of Interaction Effects (Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, 1964).Google Scholar

³² See Cosman, Bernard, Five States for Goldwater (University, University of Alabama Press, 1966), p. 49.Google Scholar

³³ See Lane, Robert E., Political Ideology (New York, Free Press of Glencoe, 1962), pp. 57 ff.Google Scholar

³⁴ See, for example, McKenzie, Robert and Silver, Allan, “Conservatism, Industrialism and the Working Class Tory in England”, Transactions of the Fifth World Congress of Sociology, vol. III (1964), pp. 191–202.Google Scholar

³⁵ See Lenski, Gerhard, The Religious Factor (New York, Anchor Books, 1963), pp. 173, 181 ff.Google Scholar

³⁶ Kirchheimer, Otto, “Germany: The Vanishing Opposition”, in Dahl, Robert A., ed., Political Oppositions in Western Democracies (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1966), pp. 237–259.Google Scholar

³⁷ Dahl, Robert A., “The American Oppositions: Affirmation and Denial”, in Dahl, ed., Political Oppositions …, p. 48.Google Scholar

³⁸ See Dahrendorf, , op. cit., pp. 213 ff., for a discussion of superimposition and pluralism.Google Scholar

³⁹ Dahl, , op. cit., p. 54.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Almond, Gabriel A. and Verba, Sidney, The Civic Culture (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1963), p. 131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar