Suchergebnisse

Political science is the product of modernity and the nation-state. A dominant tradition within it has striven for a positivistic and universal form of understanding, based on the individual actor. Developments in recent years have questioned our understanding of modernity, universalism, science, and the nation-state. Political science has responded in two ways: by reinforcing the positivist approach, or by adopting various forms of intepretivism. This has created an artificial division within the discipline. Political scientists can overcome this artificial divide by looking outside the discipline. There are promising developments in this direction but these are inhibited by trying to confine them within the dominant positivist mode. They have also responded by borrowing from neighbouring disciplines, but in doing so, they have too often appropriated concepts in simplified form or coined empty concepts. They need to take neighbouring disciplines more seriously and work across disciplinary boundaries. A pluralistic approach is possible, which neither seeks a grand synthesis of all the social sciences, nor sees them as independent and self-standing, but which encourages cross-fertilization and combinations of approaches. The existence of distinct European national and disciplinary traditions, far from being an obstacle to the development of the discipline, gives European political scientists an advantage.

Political Science has tended not to problematize human domination over nonhuman animals. Political scientists have been engaged intellectually and politically with other struggles for justice and citizenship leading one to question the apparent indifference to the issue of 'animal rights'. This paper accounts for the absence of animals in political science research and suggests that recent scholarship has begun to take animal liberation seriously. The paper then looks at the options for the broader animal liberation movement and suggests that incremental change is the best and only option for animal advocates in contemporary liberal democracies.