Suchergebnisse

Throughout my life, politics and political science have been intertwined. I handed out leaflets for Adlai Stevenson at age 12, participated in protests at Oberlin and Berkeley, and, as I developed professional expertise, worked with national security agencies. Conflict has been a continuing interest, particularly whether situations are best analyzed as a security dilemma or aggression. In exploring this question, I was drawn into both political psychology and signaling, although the two are very different. I have continued to work on each and occasionally try to bring them together. My thinking about strategic interaction led to a book-length exploration of system effects, a way of thinking that I believe is still insufficiently appreciated in the discipline and among policy makers. My research continues to be stimulated by both developments in the discipline and unfolding international politics.

Should political science be publicly relevant? Instead of furnishing a direct answer, I propose to complicate the question. Yet in doing so, I will indicate an answer. And the answer is yes, political science should be publicly relevant – but not in any simple sense, since 'political science', 'should' and indeed 'publicly relevant' are less straightforward than they might seem. In what follows I will first complicate the questions posed to political science. I will proceed to reflect on the connection between publication – one of the central activities of all science, including political science – and publicity. I will then briefly tell a story about the journal that I edit, Perspectives on Politics, and the distinctive mission of this journal, which is to serve as 'a political science public sphere'. I will conclude with some brief reflections on the best ways of thinking about how political science can and should be 'publicly relevant'.

Description based on: Vol. 603 (winter 2006). ; Imprint varies. ; Supplements accompany some issues. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This article presents an overview of the development of political science as a discipline in the Soviet Union over the last 20 years. Such an overall perspective is not easily accessible to political scientists who do not read Russian because only a small percentage of the work appears in translation. Furthermore, many scholars believe that restrictions on publication in the USSR make Soviet academic writing unworthy of perusal—a view I strongly refute here. Trends in growth and influence of Soviet political science have a bearing on the intellectual climate of the USSR and, to a certain extent, on the politics practiced there.

The 2010 U.S. Census data showed that over the last decade the Latino population grew from 35.3 million to 50.5 million, accounting for more than half of the nation's population growth. This book collects essays that examine this phenomenal growth. In order to understand the Latino community in all its diversity, the analysis has to begin at the grassroots level. The political future of the Latino community in the United States in the twenty-first century will be largely determined by the various roles they have played in the major urban centers across the nation. These essays collectively suggest that political agency can encompass everything from voting, lobbying, networking, grassroots organizing, and mobilization, to dramatic protest. Latinos are in fact gaining access to the same political institutions that worked so hard to marginalize them.

1. Foundations of Political Science - 2. The State and its Elements - 3. The Concept of Sovereignty - 4. Classification of Constitution - 5. Law,Justice,Liberty,Equality - 6. Franchise and Representation - 7. The Democracy - 8. Political Party System - 9. Democratic Decentralization - 10. International Political Order

Leo Strauss's article "An Epilogue" is made up of many different critical arguments about political science. The guiding principles of these arguments are not revealed clearly enough. One can even get the impression that "An Epilogue" is an unfinished article. Only after finding the guiding principles we can understand the Strauss's critique. He emphasized the difference between the philosophical and scientific approach to politics. "An Epilogue" shows that he understood political science as philosophy.

The defence of political science rests on a starting proposition that practitioners of political science need to embrace relevance rather than fear. Defending the role of politics in resolving societal dilemmas is in part a responsibility of those who study it and the challenge is significant given evidence of disenchantment with the political process in many established and mew democracies. Political science needs to offer not only an understanding of politics that is theoretical, sophisticated and empirically rigorous but also an approach that is not just problem‐focused but solution‐seeking. Defending political science means defending politics and taking on the challenge of improving its practice.