{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03571428571428571, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.876190476190477, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cycling through American Politics

"The great problem in American politics," E. E. Schattschneider writes, "is: What makes things happen? ... What is the process of change? What does change look like?" Schattschneider offered a theory of political conflict in answer to his question, but the more common response is some variant on the idea of cycles-of regular rhythms or recurring patterns-whose dynamic is the key to unlocking the mysteries of change in American politics. This article analyzes cyclical theories of politics, evaluates a number of them, and urges political scientists to take them more seriously.