Two Powers in Heaven in Ancient Judaism
443 pages
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe
Tout savoir sur nos offres

Two Powers in Heaven in Ancient Judaism


Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe
Tout savoir sur nos offres
443 pages


  • leçon - matière potentielle : the hebrew
  • dissertation
1 Michael S. Heiser Providence, RI; ETS, 2008 The Concept of a Godhead in Israelite Religion Introduction The search for the doctrine of the godhead in the Old Testament is hardly new. Those of us whose field focuses on the Old Testament are well aware that as far back as the apostolic fathers thinkers and scholars have ferreted through the text on a quest to find traces of this fundamental point of Christian theology.
  • baal
  • hebrew bible
  • israelite religion
  • israelite divine council
  • yahweh
  • orthodox israelite yahwism
  • figure
  • ancient
  • council



Publié par
Nombre de lectures 20
Langue English
Poids de l'ouvrage 1 Mo




David A. Owen

B.S., University of Maryland University College, 1997
M.S., Troy University, 1998
M.S., Troy University, 2004

A Dissertation
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Doctor in Philosophy

Department of Political Science
in the Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
December 2011

Copyright by David A. Owen, 2011
All Rights Reserved


David A. Owen

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in the field of Political Science

Approved by:
Stephen Shulman, PhD, Chair
Frederick Solt, PhD
Stephen R. Bloom, PhD
J. Tobin Grant, PhD
David L. Wilson, PhD

Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
August 17, 2011

presented on August 17, 2011, at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.


MAJOR PROFESSOR: Dr. Stephen Shulman

Over the last four decades, many developing countries transitioned to democracy with
populations aspiring to break from authoritarian tradition for more representative government.
While this wave of democratization was encouraging initially, observers came to realize that the
break from tradition was anything but complete. The traditional clientelistic relations that
pervaded political systems during authoritarian periods have been eroded by democratization in
some countries, while in other countries, clientelism is thriving and continuing to impact
political participation, primarily through vote-buying between patrons and clients. Therefore, the
extent to which democratization erodes clientelism as widely expected, could not be assumed.
The questions of what are the causal effects of clientelism on political participation, how does the
vote-buying process unfold, how effective are the efforts to combat vote-buying, and what is the
debate over the ethics of vote-buying motivate this dissertation; I draw on the experiences of
Thai provinces to answer them.
The objective of this dissertation is to examine the impact of clientelism, measured by
vote-buying, on political participation using a multi-method approach. Using new primary and
secondary data sources, I make several important original contributions with this study. First, I
answer the question regarding the causal effects of clientelism on political participation by
testing the resource theory and the theory of clientelism. I find that the poor, who are most likely
to be enmeshed in clientelistic networks, voted just as often as the rich in two of the three general
elections and both the national and local level elections. People in the countryside, the poor, vote
more than their urban counterparts in both the national and local level elections. The poor also
participate in the other forms of politics just as much as the rich. I find those with less education
vote just as much as those with more education in all three general elections and the national
level election, however, those with higher education voted more in the local level election. Those
with higher education also boycott, demonstrate, and sign petitions more than those with lower
education. I find that clientelism is the reason lower socioeconomic status rural individuals
participate in politics as without clientelism, they would not be expected to participate as much
as their richer and more educated urban counterparts.
Second, I answer the question regarding how the vote-buying process unfolds by
exploring original primary interview data collected by the author of elite and mass views of vote-
buyers, sellers, intermediaries, and the vote-buying process. I find that all the actors involved
have their own reasons and motivations for participating in the vote-buying process: vote-sellers
are predominantly poor and poverty drives their need for the compensation provided through
vote-buying, while vote-buyers and their intermediaries are very much aware of the needs of
potential vote-sellers and they intentionally exploit these needs. Even though the poor are driven
to become vote-sellers, we cannot readily assume that vote-buying is successful for vote-buyers,
or in other words, we cannot assume that vote-buying results in votes for the vote-buyer. Prior to
my study, scholars have made such an assumption, whether directly stated or inferred, which may
lead to erroneous conclusions about the effectiveness of vote-buying resulting in votes for the
vote-buyer. To overcome this, I developed a model of the vote-buying process where vote-buying
is divided into specific steps: the offer to buy votes, the acceptance of the offer, the
compensation, the showing up at the polls, and the casting of a vote for the vote-buyer. By
employing my model of the vote-buying process, we see that sometimes voters act in a manner
that is consistent with the vote-buyer’s demands and others times they do not at virtually all the
steps of the vote-buying process for very specific reasons, including poverty.
Third, I answer the question regarding the effectiveness of efforts to combat vote-buying
by exploring elite and mass views of the effectiveness of institutional constraints and civic
education in combating vote-buying. My findings suggest that institutional constraints, namely
the Election Commission, have some impact on reducing vote-buying, though the Election
Commission is plagued with far-reaching limitations. I find attempts at civic education, however,
are not really measurable. Even if these attempts at civic education were measurable, I do not
believe there is any reason to suspect they would be effective considering they do not address the
poverty issue.
Finally, I answer the question regarding the debate over the ethics of vote-buying by
exploring elite and mass views of the justifications for vote-buying. I then analyze the impact of
vote-buying on the legitimacy of the Thai political system. I find that some Thais perceive vote-
buying as unethical because it is illegal and dishonest, while others do not necessarily perceive
vote-buying as unethical because of poverty and vote-buying norms Thais use to justify selling
their votes. Moreover, I find that poverty and vote-buying norms impact the legitimacy of the
Thai political system, especially for the rural poor, to the point where I argue that vote-buying
does not necessarily negatively impact legitimacy of the Thai political system. Overall, this
dissertation has answered the important questions about clientelism and the vote-buying measure.
This study is important because clientelism is one of the most important informal institutional
obstacles to free and fair elections and the findings in this study offer clarity of the impact of
clientelism, and the vote-buying measure, on political participation in the Thai context.
I would like to make a few important dedications with this study. First and foremost, I
want to dedicate this study to my beautiful wife, Apinya Owen, and my son, Eiden Ananda
Owen. I thank you so much for your patience and quite frankly, I would never have finished this
study without your love and support. I love both of you with all my heart.
I would also like to dedicate this study to important members of my family. To my father,
John Overton Owen, who taught me to be independent and aggressively pursue my dreams and
goals and not settle for the mundane. To my belated grandparents, Dewey and Aileen, I know you
are proud. To my siblings, Chris, Michael, Stacie, Curtis, and Loara, and my nieces and nephews,
Christy, Melissa, Owen, and Payton, and extended family, Mary and Bill, I dedicate this to you
and thanks for being tolerant of my endless discussions on the same topic day after day, week
after week, and month after month. I can finally say, it’s over and I promise to contribute more
exciting topics to our discussions in the future. I know that you are finally happy to know that
you do not have to hear me talk about this study at length anymore!
Last, but definitely not least, I would like to dedicate this study to the wonderful people of
Thailand. I sincerely hope that this study contributes in some small way to making Thailand, the
country that I deeply cherish and will always hold a special place in my heart and thoughts, an
even better place and start to heal the divisive wounds that have plagued you over the past few
years. Thank you for allowing me the honor of conducting this study.

Many people supported the successful completion of this work and I am grateful to them
for their support throughout this study. First and foremost, I want to acknowledge the love and
support of my beautiful wife, Apinya. “I could not have done this without you honey! Thank you
and I love you!”
I want to thank all of my committee members for all of the advice, guidance, and support.
I want to thank Steve Shulman for his patience and guidance provided throughout the proposal
and dissertation phases. Moreover, thanks for helping me work out this model of the vote-buying
process. I want to thank Fred Solt for all of his help and the initial conception of investigating the
role of clientelism in driving political participation and his guidance throughout the dissertation. I
want to thank J. Tobin Grant for all of their help on working out the statistical tests in this
dissertation. I want to thank Steve Bloom for teaching me to be a bit more assertive and
confident in my original contributions. I want to thank David L. Wilson for his patience, advice,
and guidance throughout my years at Southern Illinois University in both the professional and
personal capacities. I truly appreciate all of your support throughout my dissertation and doctoral
career. All of you can rest easy now that I will not be bothering you with the mass emails about
this dissertation.
I want to thank my colleagues at the Graduate School of Southern Illinois University
Carbondale for listening to me go on and on about Thailand in our discussions. It’s safe now; you
don’t have to avoid me anymore.
I want to thank all of my friends who, in some way, contributed to the success of this
study, including, but not limited to, Susan Babbitt, Nat Boonnithivorakul, Nipaporn Bunloor,
Kiriti Gowda, Mana-anya Iemsam-arng, Anan Osothsilp, Ernest Rayburn, Charles Simpson,
Warravit Sakmanarit, Apimook Sawanprathan, Chonphatsorn Sawanprathan, and Ratna Sinha.
Finally, to the many others who have made my experiences in Carbondale enjoyable, I thank you.
Data analyzed in this study were collected by the Asian Barometer Project (2005-2008),
which was co-directed by Professors Fu Hu and Yun-han Chu and received major funding
support from Taiwan’s Ministry of Education, Academia Sinica and National Taiwan University.
The Asian Barometer Project Office ( is solely responsible for the data
distribution. The author appreciates the assistance in providing data by the institutes and
individuals aforementioned. The views expressed herein are the author’s own.
The test of the hypotheses of the resource theory and theory of clientelism for the 2005
Thai Election was previously published in the Journal of Asian Politics and Policy, 1(2), pp. 307-
324. Permission was granted by the journal to use this in the dissertation, see Appendix H for the
permission letter. A previous version of the results from the 2005 Thai National Election was
also presented at the 2008 Midwest Political Science Association meeting. A previous version of
the results from the 1996, 2001, and 2005 Thai elections was presented at the 2009 Southwest
Political Science Association meeting.
I want to thank the following individuals and organizations for their generous donations
and financial support provided to make this study possible: Thomas McBride of Colonial Freight
Systems, Inc., John O. Owen, Mary O. White, and William J. White Jr.
The data, files, and transcripts for this study will be stored at the Inter-University
Consortium for Political and Social Research at the University of Michigan
Last but not least, I thank my God for getting me through this study and I only hope
contribute in some small way to make the world a better place.
All errors remain my sole responsibility.
vi i