Suchergebnisse

The last conversations I had with Lee Ann Fujii had nothing to do with violence, research methods, or political science. Called unexpectedly to her mother's deathbed in Seattle after a week of meetings in Washington, DC, Lee Ann was out of clean clothes and preparing to catch a hurriedly-bought flight. And so, on a chilly, drizzly grey morning in Baltimore, I left her in my apartment with a laundry card and ran off to a meeting. Returning home a few hours later, I opened the door to find Dr. Lee Ann Fujii—academic heavyweight, author of burn-it-down speeches, and potential future tenureletter-writer—decked out in snake-print yoga pants and cheerfully folding my laundry as well as her own. Laughing at my abject horror, Lee Ann explained that she found folding freshly laundered clothes calming. And indeed, as our conversations turned to family dynamics surrounding acute illness, the #MeToo movement, and the intricacies of real estate acquisition, the smell of clean laundry soothingly lingered around us as rain pattered against the windows.

Politische Wissenschaft ist in Südafrika eine relativ junge Disziplin mit einer nur kurzen Geschichte und stark geprägt von männlicher Dominanz im Wissenschaftsbereich. Die Autorin analysiert die hierfür verantwortlichen Gründe. Einer mag darin liegen, daß sich die Disziplin nicht mit der privaten Sphäre des Menschen befaßt. Als viel wesentlicher wird jedoch schon während des Studiums die mit der männlichen Dominanz verbundene Diskriminierung weiblicher Studenten angesehen, die nicht ernst genommen, deshalb marginalisiert werden und dadurch häufig den Glauben an die eigenen Fähigkeiten verlieren. Aus diesem Grund sind Frauen im Bereich der politischen Wissenschaft weitgehend unsichtbar und wenn überhaupt, dann nur in untergeordneten Positionen tätig. (DÜI-Hlb)

A review essay on books by (1) R. Blackburn & R. Plant (Eds), Constitutional Reform (London & New York: Longman, 1999); (2) M. Foley, The Politics of the British Constitution (Manchester: Manchester U Press, 1999); (3) R. Hazell (Ed), Constitutional Futures: A History of the Next Ten Years (Oxford: Oxford U Press, 1999); & (4) K. Sutherland (Ed), The Rape of the Constitution? (Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2000). These four books focus on two aspects of contemporary British government: the limits inherent in British parliamentary democracy & the Labour government's influence on the rise of a new constitutionalism. Blackburn & Plant's objective is to determine how the Labour Party's objectives can be achieved while still taking constitutional reforms into consideration. Though this objective is met, three weaknesses are evident: the book's timing, its ineffective introduction, & its lack of an integrating concluding chapter. Sutherland fails entirely in his attempt to outline contemporary constitutional reform. In fact, his book offers little toward the development of any sort of reform program. Hazel's work is a project stemming from the Constitution Unit. Its primary purpose is to examine the effects of recently instituted constitutional reform programs. Although the collection offers an important account of "present-descriptive" & "future-prescriptive"eform, because it went to press too early, important considerations are absent. Foley's book is not only interesting & original, but also worthy of critical attention. However, Foley fails to develop his ideas, & his lack of historical sense is evident. 21 References. Adapted from the source document.

This year, at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association (APSA) in Chicago, the Caucus for a New Political Science celebrated its 40th anniversary, which makes the Caucus the oldest organized grouping of progressive political scientists in the United States. For the last 40 years, the Caucus has worked to support young & diverse scholar-activists pursuing a wide variety of theoretical & methodological projects with the goal of making the study of political science relevant to the struggle for a better world. The Caucus includes political scientists of diverse viewpoints, but it is united by the idea that the discipline should abandon "the myth of a value-free science" & openly advance a progressive political agenda. The Caucus has always advanced a critique of mainstream social science drawing on C. Wright Mills's observation that contemporary behavioralism is "a set of bureaucratic techniques which inhibit social inquiry by 'methodological' pretensions, which congest such work by obscurantist conceptions, or which trivialize it by concern with minor problems unconnected with publicly relevant issues." Forty years after its founding, the Caucus continues to reject the mainstream scientific claim that politics can & should be studied apolitically. Adapted from the source document.

This year, at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association (APSA) in Chicago, the Caucus for a New Political Science celebrated its 40th anniversary, which makes the Caucus the oldest organized grouping of progressive political scientists in the United States. For the last 40 years, the Caucus has worked to support young & diverse scholar-activists pursuing a wide variety of theoretical & methodological projects with the goal of making the study of political science relevant to the struggle for a better world. The Caucus includes political scientists of diverse viewpoints, but it is united by the idea that the discipline should abandon "the myth of a value-free science" & openly advance a progressive political agenda. The Caucus has always advanced a critique of mainstream social science drawing on C. Wright Mills's observation that contemporary behavioralism is "a set of bureaucratic techniques which inhibit social inquiry by 'methodological' pretensions, which congest such work by obscurantist conceptions, or which trivialize it by concern with minor problems unconnected with publicly relevant issues." Forty years after its founding, the Caucus continues to reject the mainstream scientific claim that politics can & should be studied apolitically. Adapted from the source document.

What about taking time to improve how we cooperate? "Public policy should [.] facilitate the development of institutions that bring out the best in humans," so Elinor Ostrom. Here, I propose to critically reflect on some of the beliefs embedded in each and every scientific question, and methodology, especially medical research as it affects us all. One goal is to raise awareness about ways to improve the trustworthiness, plurality and openness of science.

What about taking time to improve how we cooperate? "Public policy should [.] facilitate the development of institutions that bring out the best in humans," so Elinor Ostrom. Here, I propose to critically reflect on some of the beliefs embedded in each and every scientific question, and methodology, especially medical research as it affects us all. One goal is to raise awareness about ways to improve the trustworthiness, plurality and openness of science.

APSA is excited to once again return to Chicago for the
103rd Annual Meeting, which will be held from August
30–September 2, 2007. There is no place more fitting than the Windy
City, home of the ground-breaking social science innovation of the
various Chicago Schools of the mid-twentieth century, to celebrate
the diversity of the political science profession and this year's
program theme, "Political Science and Beyond." The program
committee, chaired by Elisabeth R. Gerber (University of Michigan)
and David A. Lake (University of California, San Diego) has put
together an impressive program, consisting of over 800 panels in 46
Thematic Divisions. Panels and plenary sessions will focus on the
idea of interdisciplinarity and will feature discussions and
presentations from some of the most respected social scientists of
our time. In addition, the program chairs have put together several
theme panels which will address topics directly related to the
meeting's theme, as well as current issues and hot topics in today's
society.