Advertisement

The Perestroika Movement in American Political Science and Its Lessons for Chinese Political Studies

  • Shelley Rigger
Chapter

Abstract

On October 15, 2000, an anonymous political scientist (or group of them) sent an email over the signature “Mr. Perestroika.” Mr. Perestroika’s message was addressed to a handful of political scientists, and it invited the recipients to forward it to others. Within a few days, the message had spread throughout the community of political scientists in the US. Two weeks later, 125 scholars – including several of America’s best-known political scientists – signed a letter drafted by Yale professor Rogers Smith. They said the discipline was “in danger of alienating a larger and larger number of those who should be its active members, and contributing less and less to the kinds of understanding of politics that it is our responsibility to advance” (Eakin 2000).

Keywords

Political Scientist Political Theory American Politics American Political Science Review Comparative Politics 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Beer SH (2005) Letter to a graduate student. In: Monroe KR (ed) Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp 53–60Google Scholar
  2. Coppedge M (1999) Thickening thin concepts and theories: combining large N and small in comparative politics. Comp Polit 31(4):467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cumings B, Jacobsen K (2006) Prying open American political ‘science’. Post-Autistic Economics Review, issue no. 37, 28 Apr 2006, article 5. Accessed at: http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue37/CumingsJacabsen37.htm
  4. Dryzek JS (2002) A pox on perestroika, a hex on hegemony: toward a critical political science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston Marriott Copley Place, Sheraton Boston & Hynes Convention Center, Boston Online <PDF>. 2009-02-06 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p65044_index.html
  5. Eakin E (2000) Think tank: political scientists leading a revolt, not studying one. New York Times, 4 November, p B11Google Scholar
  6. Holmes JS (2008) Approaches to comparative politics: insights from political theory. Lexington Books, Lanham, pp 145–146Google Scholar
  7. Jacobsen K (2005) Perestroika in American political science. Post-Autistic Economics Review, issue no. 32, 5 July 2005, article 6. http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue32/Jacobsen32.htm
  8. Kaska G (2012) Perestroika: for an ecumenical science of politics. Post-Autistic Economics Review. Available at: http://www.btinternet.com/∼pae_news/Perestroika/Kaska.htm
  9. Kinnvall C (2005) Not here, not now! The absence of a European Perestroika Movement. In: Monroe KR (ed) Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven, p 21Google Scholar
  10. Lowi TJ (2005) Every poet his own Aristotle. In: Monroe KR (ed) Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven, p 48Google Scholar
  11. Miller DW (2001) Storming the palace in political science: scholars join revolt against the domination of mathematical approaches to the discipline. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 21 SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  12. Pion-Berlin D, Clearly D (2005) Methodological bias in the APSR. In: Monroe KR (ed) Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven, p 307Google Scholar
  13. Rudolph SH (2005) Perestroika and its other. In: Monroe KR (ed) Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven, p 15Google Scholar
  14. Schram SF (2005) A return to politics: perestroika, pronesis and postparadigmatic political science. In: Monroe KR (ed) Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp 103–114Google Scholar
  15. Schram SF (forthcoming) Below: should we be seeking explanation, or understanding? Political Science Research: From Theory to Practice. Forthcoming as a “Core essay” in the International Encyclopedia of Political Science, available at http://www.u.arizona.edu/∼jag/POL602/SchramPolSci.PDF
  16. Smith RM (2002) Should we make political science more of a science or more about politics? PS Online, p 199. Available at: PSOnline www.apsanet.org
  17. Warren DT (2005) Will the Perestroikniks please stand up? In: Monroe KR (ed) Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in political science. Yale University Press, New Haven, p 223Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.East Asian PoliticsDavidson CollegeDavidsonUSA

Personalised recommendations