Suchergebnisse

Political science has developed rapidly in the last half-century, but this has posed at least three serious problems. First, almost no attention has been given to political activity in private bodies: the scope of political analysis is narrowed as a result. Second, the connection between political science and 'policy analysis' is wholly unclear, which raises the danger that political science may want to cover too much or too little! Third, political science has always been concerned with norms, yet aims to be a science: this is no easy relationship. Adapted from the source document.

My interest in the world of politics began when I was a high school student. However, in the authoritarian structure of Soviet society political science as an independent scientific discipline, was, for a long period, considered to be a "capitalist" science. When I was in Azerbaijan State Pedagogical University there was no major in political science so I chose history as my major because it was the closest.

Political science, as we currently understand the label, was born, in Western Europe, in the early Fifties. One may say that it was "reborn"; but that would be inaccurate, for in the nineteenth century and until World War Two the label indicated a captive discipline largely dominated by juridical or historical approaches (as in the case, e.g., of Gaetano Mosca). So political science had a new start and became a field of inquiry in its own right about half a century ago. I was, at the time, one of its founders (with Stein Rokkan, Juan Linz, Mattei Dogan, Hans Daalder, Erik Allardt, S. N. Eisenstadt, and others. See: Comparative European Politics: The Story of a Profession, edited by H. Daalder, 1997). I am thus one of the witnesses of what the "young turks" of the time had in mind, of how we conceived and promoted political science. I am now an "ancient sage" and it now pleases me to reflect, some fifty years later, on where political science has gone and on whether it has taken the right course, the course that I had wished for and expected. Thus to ask today, in the middle of Mitteleuropa, where political science has been heading is also to ask whether the new beginnings of the discipline in Eastern Europe should or should not follow the path entered by our "big brother," I mean, by American-type political science. I too have been somewhat swallowed by our big brother (to be sure, a benevolent and well meaning one) in the sense that I have been teaching in the United States for some thirty years. Let me add that I have largely benefited from my American exposure. Yet I have always resisted and still resist the American influence. And I take this occasion to say why I am unhappy about the American molding of present day political science.

Political scientists want to do good. They want to expand knowledge about political life, but also they wish to use knowledge for political reform. Usually this means desiring to promote "democratization." Historically democracy and political science have tended to develop together. In modest ways political science can contribute to the emergence of democracy. Political reform succeeds best if it occurs incrementally, in the spirit of "one soul at a time."

Recent years have seen a tremendous surge of public interest in partisan gerrymandering, including robust reform efforts and multiple high-profile court cases. Political scientists have played an important role in this debate, reaching an unusually high level of public engagement. Yet this public-facing period has to some extent obscured promising avenues for future research within the discipline. I review the history of political science and redistricting and describe how research on this topic has been shaped by the newfound interest. The goals of the law differ from those of political science, so research that focuses squarely on the former often misses opportunities to advance the latter. I lay out the contours of this difference and then suggest reframing the existing metrics of partisan gerrymandering to make them useful for more traditionally scientific questions. Finally, I offer some ideas about what those future questions might look like when reframed in this way.

The value of political science in information culture of society reveals; the main indicators of the public status of political science are investigated; the main functions of political science in the activity of actors of society are characterised.

Includes indexes. ; First ed. published in 1910 by the Classification Division. ; "Additions and changes to April 1900": 137 p. at end. ; Mode of access: Internet.

In 2011, the Fulbright Scholar Program celebrates its 65th anniversary as America's preeminant international educational exchange program. In recognition of its international impact, this is a timely occasion to recall the program's history and note the roles of political scientists who have taught and conducted research around the globe as Fulbright Scholars. Adapted from the source document.