A Case Study of the Effects of Public Opinion on the Utilization of Law in a Conflict Resolution: An Exemplification of Cahn\u27s Sense of Injustice

Most modern research has concluded that the general public participates in such a small way and possesses so little specific knowledge of political issues and events that those who govern are given very considerable discretion. For example, Dahl observed that politics is a sideshow in the great circus of life. Presthus pointed out: It is well known that individual participation in political affairs, beyond voting, is limited to a small minority of the population. Converse concluded that government officials, in those (few) situations where they recognize public opinion, are prone to see it as \u27an entity to be guided, not to be guided by. , Wahlke makes a heavily documented argument along this line, pointing out that, among other things, few citizens entertain interests that clearly represent \u27policy demands\u27 or \u27policy expectations\u27 or wishes and desires that are readily convertible into them , relatively few citizens communicate with their representatives, and citizens are not especially interested or informed about the policymaking activities of their representatives as such. Studies designed to determine the impact of constituency attitudes on congressional voting behavior have found that such influences seem to be important only in limited policy areas