The History of Political Science

The history of political science serves as a context within which we make sense of the nature and role of our discipline. Narratives about the past development of British and American political science help to frame debates, choices, and identities within the contemporary discipline in Britain. What do recent studies on the history of political science tell us about the character of political science in Britain and America? What do they suggest about the relation of the British study of politics to British identities more generally? Our review of recent work concentrates on three issues: (1) how historical studies of political science relate to approaches and identities within the contemporary discipline; (2) how they relate to the past, i.e. whether their historical vision is marred by presentism; (3) whether they look beyond the boundaries of the discipline.     

Introduction: The Future of British Political History

Politics and history are closely intertwined and historians play a vital role in British public life. Yet, British political history, which has a critical contribution to make for understanding British politics today, faces two urgent challenges. First, academic history has retreated from subjects that remain hugely popular in media and trade publishing and of interest to social scientists, such as the histories of political institutions and formal power structures. Second, political history is disconnected from innovative trends in the wider historiography of modern Britain. Combined, these issues leave political historians in an ambiguous position in relation to the wider field, to other academic disciplines and to contemporary political debates. After discussing these challenges, this introduction surveys this special issue, which reflects on what (if anything) is distinctive about political history as practised today, and what its contribution to historiography, social science and public life should be. It ends by posing key questions for historians of all methodological stripes who investigate Britain's political past.     

Diversifying British Political History

This article explores what the diversification of British political history might look like. Building on an expanded definition of citizenship and attention to ‘ordinary’ politics, it suggests several questions which might diversify political history's content and approach. Whom do we count as political actors? Who has access to democratic processes and where does politics happen beyond these processes? To what forms of political thought do we attend? Drawing on examples from my own research on refugees and asylum seekers in modern Britain, and on the wider field of modern British history, I demonstrate the possibilities of diversification as a way to enliven political history's future.     

The Politics of Race and the Future of British Political History

This article addresses the field of British political history's blind spot when it comes to race. Where modern British political historians are comfortable approaching politics in ‘high’ and ‘popular’ forms as well as in terms of ideas, institutions and policy, they often struggle even to see a politics of race in operation. Using examples drawn from research on the post-1945 history of the white supremacist movement in Britain, this article maintains that the means to render race visible in the political history of modern Britain lies in the incorporation of previously overlooked perspectives. In search of these perspectives, it looks to black British history and critical studies of race. In particular, it highlights analyses and critiques of British racism by black political activists, from those who organised in response to the 1959 murder of Kelso Cochrane, to the Black Power groups of the 1970s.     

The Future of British Political History: Concluding Remarks

These concluding remarks reflect, in the light of the preceding articles, on two themes that recur throughout the collection. First, how can historians maintain an effective presence in public debate about politics in Britain? Second, how should political historians position themselves within the discipline, at a time when—it is suggested—political history is losing ground among British academic historians? It is argued here that, in each case, they should reflect on what they can most distinctively contribute, either as historians or as political historians; and that they should frame their interventions accordingly.     

The Use of Indirection in Televised Political Debates

ABSTRACT

We examine the use of indirection in the three televised debates between George Bush and Al Gore during the 2000 American presidential race. Indirection is a discursive process that enables a speaker to perform a nonliteral “primary” speech act by performing a literal “secondary” speech act. Eight mechanisms of indirection are characterized and explained using examples from the debates. Their occurrence in the debates is also analyzed. The indirection used most often saw the speaker promising to perform an action by expressing his intention to do so. A comparison is made between the American debates and Canadian and Quebec debates. Also questioned is the persuasive effect of indirection in political communication and its potential for strategists and for future research in light of the presented results.     

Why Political Science Needs History

This paper examines the changing relationship between the study of history and the study of political science. It reviews the tensions which produced a divorce between the two subjects, particularly in the United States when behavioural political science was dominant. It then examines five areas in which history has enriched the study of politics: as a source of material; as a demonstration of the links between the present and the past; as a body of knowledge to test theories; as a means of analysing political concepts and as a source of lessons. It concludes that the links between the two subjects today are strong, but that the contribution of history is more as a body of knowledge than as a set of distinctive methods.     

The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International's Approach to Measuring Corruption

The annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), published by Transparency International (TI), has had a pivotal role in focusing attention on corruption. Despite recent critiques of the CPI, it remains highly influential on research into the causes of corruption and is also extensively used to galvanise support for measures to fight corruption. In this article we explore the CPI in more depth in order to highlight how the index has been used for political ends which may not always turn out to be supportive of anti-corruption efforts. The argument is developed in four sections: in the first, we focus on Transparency International's definition of corruption, highlighting some conceptual difficulties with the approach adopted and its relationship to the promotion of 'good governance' as the principal means of combating corruption. In the second section, we outline some methodological difficulties in the design of the Corruption Perceptions Index. Although the CPI has been much criticised, we demonstrate in the third section that the index continues to exercise great influence both in academic research and in the politics of anti-corruption efforts, particularly as exercised by Transparency International itself. In the final section we argue that the CPI contributes to the risk of creating a 'corruption trap' in countries where corruption is deeply embedded, as development aid is increasingly made conditional on the implementation of reforms which are impossible to achieve without that aid.     

The Political Use of Evidence and Its Contribution to Democratic Discourse

This article argues that evidence, even when used politically, contributes to high‐quality democratic discourse. Research results on the use of evidence in referendum campaigns in Switzerland show that (1) evidence fosters discourse quality and shifts the focus away from politics to policy; (2) evaluations and basic research contribute positively to discourse, but not opinion surveys and statistics; (3) the participation of experts and administrative practitioners in discourse is crucial to make evidence available to the public; and (4) evidence is always used as a part of a narrative and can alter the constructed images used in a story. In conclusion, the implications for practitioners are discussed.     

Political Branding: The Tea Party and Its Use of Participation Branding

The emergence of the Tea Party movement in 2009 witnessed the surfacing of a populist, anti-Obama libertarian mobilization within the United States. The Tea Party, a movement that brought together a number of disparate groups—some new, some established—utilized participation branding where the consumer attributed the movement its own identity and brand. Its consumer-facing approach, lack of one single leader, and lack of a detailed party platform, in combination with its impact on the 2010 election races in America, earmarks it as a contemporary and unconventional brand phenomenon worthy of investigation.     

纠治党内政治虚无主义的百年历程、经验及启示

党内政治虚无主义是与马克思主义政党旗帜鲜明讲政治要求根本对立的一种异化政治现象。坚决纠治党内政治虚无主义,是马克思主义建党原则的重要内容,是实现党长期执政的必要条件,是永葆党的先进性和纯洁性的内在要求。百年来,中国共产党与党内政治虚无主义进行了坚决的斗争,积累了丰富的经验。纠治党内政治虚无主义的百年经验启示我们:必须坚持实事求是的原则,把坚定理想信念作为内在动力,把坚持和加强党的领导作为根本途径,把不断推进党的自我革命作为根本保证。