สำนักราชบัณฑิตยสภา

«“√ “√ √“™∫— ≥±‘ µ¬ ∂“π ‚°«‘ ∑ «ß»å ÿ √«— ≤πå 57 ªï ∑’Ë ÛÚ ©∫— ∫∑’Ë Ò ¡.§.-¡’ .§. Úıı Abstract A Comparative Contextual Study of the 18 th and 27 th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution Kovit Wongsurawat Associate Fellow of the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences, the Royal Institute, Thailand In researching any social phenomenon, context is an issue which must be considered very seriously. Context refers to the whole environment at any particular moment. Context is a combination of material, cultural and psychological systems and factors which work together in mutual dependence, like the hardware and software in a computer. A comparative study of the story of the 18 th and 27 th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution reveals different contexts in the American nation during two overlapping periods. From the time it was first conceived to the day it was finally repealed, the story of the 18 th Amendment was relatively brief - only 30 years altogether. By contrast, what eventually became the 27 th Amend- ment, though it was first proposed over 200 years ago, was adopted only in 1992. The stories of these amendments show that a context must exist in order for a particular social phenomenon to flourish. But history never repeats itself, as the old saying goes: one cannot jump into the same river twice. The anti-liquor campaign reached its height with the arrival of Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola, which offered alternatives to alcoholic drinks. The two soft-drink companies lent great support to the movement to ban alcohol, hoping that their own markets would expand as a result. The case of the 27 th Amendment, regarding the rule for raising the salaries of members of Congress, was quite different, since the chances of its final passage were greatly improved by the efforts of a single, very determined citizen. Key words : context, Amendment, the U.S. constitution