Suchergebnisse

There have been a number of attempts in recent years to define the subject-matter of political science and to provide a theoretical framework within which the discipline may be expected to develop. Among these, the work of David Easton occupies a leading place.1 This article discusses how successful Easton has been in adumbrating a general theory embracing the discipline. It then offers a rather looser and less ambitious framework within which the theories collectively called 'political science' may be placed and their interrelationships perceived.

"In 1950, the Committee on Political Parties of the American Political Science Association (APSA) published its much-anticipated report, Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System. Highly critical of the existing state of affairs, the report became extremely controversial: before publication, scholars attacked the committee's draft and suggested it should be suppressed. When released it received a barrage of criticisms. Most academics concluded it was an ill-conceived and mistaken initiative. Mark Wickham-Jones provides the first full, archival-based assessment of the arguments within APSA about political parties and the 1950 report. He details the report's failure to generate wider discussion between media, politicians, and the White House. He examines whether it was dominated by a dogmatic attachment to "party government," and charts the relationship between behavioralists and institutionalists. He also discusses the political dimension to research during the McCarthyite years, and reflects on the nature of American political science in the years after 1945, the period in which behavioralism (which privileges the influence of individuals over institutions) became dominant. Detailing APSA's most direct and significant intervention in the political process, Wickham-Jones makes an important contribution to debates that remain in the forefront of discussions about American politics"--

Publication date based on date received. ; "Mr. Bradford, presently completing his degree in political science., prepared this report." ; Mode of access: Internet.

Originally published in 1975, this book advocates a certain approach to the study of government: the focus should be institutional, the method comparative and the level practical. The book divides into 2 sections on political science and public administration but the themes are common, as is much of the subject matter.