Philosophy

Perspectives on Politics is a general journal of political science that seeks to provide political insight on important problems. The papers we publish emerge from rigorous, broad-based research and integrative thought. The editors anticipate authors and readers primarily comprising political scientists, but also including journalists, policy analysts, public officials and their staff, and other social scientists. Our authors aim to clarify for their readers the political significance of accumulated research regarding a particular area of the world, an important policy problem, a deep normative conflict, or a significant institution or process; they may also demonstrate the insights that accrue from viewing politics from a distinctive viewpoint, method, or type of evidence.

Articles in Perspectives on Politics should encourage members of different subfields of political science to speak to one another--and with knowledgeable people outside the discipline--on issues of common interest. To do that, they must be conceived differently from most articles in political science journals. Those typically address the author's peers in a specialized area and thus can presume that readers use the same tools and terminology and know the general context and significance of the author's query. By contrast, in Perspectives each article must be meaningful for people with much general knowledge of politics but often with scant specific knowledge of the issue at hand.

Contributors may take a variety of approaches, illustrated by but not limited to the following possibilities:

• Explaining what central political issues are at stake in a given topic of research (such as classical Greek philosophy, the development of an independent judiciary, the nature of politics in a particular country or region, campaign finance reform, or state involvement in international trade). An article in this vein should show why those issues matter to a wide audience and how the reader should understand the issues in light of particular evidence, history, frameworks, or values. It will probably also explain what problems remain to be studied or cannot be resolved. Such a piece may offer a distinct, even contentious (but well-defended) stance rather than a neutral or carefully balanced judiciousness, so long as it fairly articulates opposing viewpoints. Alternatively, it could offer a broad summary of an emerging research subfield or bring together disparate sets of literature that are mutually illuminating. Several articles that represent varied viewpoints, types of evidence, epistemological frameworks, or conclusions and recommendations could be combined into a symposium or other type of structured exchange; we invite proposals for these.
  
  
• Showing what political science can offer to help people understand a crucial political event or tendency (such as the rise of religiously-inspired political terrorism, illegal immigration from poor to wealthy nations, or the demand for democratic elections). What does the academic study of politics and power teach us that journalists, political actors, or insightful observers cannot? Where appropriate, authors are encouraged to offer recommendations for political action, moral judgment, or policy choices as a way of demonstrating the distinctive contributions of the discipline of political science to the problem at hand.
  
  
• Showing how a multiplicity of individual research projects in a given area, once suitably organized and connected, adds up to a major shift in our understanding of some important aspect of politics. Artfully crafted and thematically oriented review essays of major books and articles are the most obvious and appropriate way of accomplishing this task. Authors could also review Web sites, political speeches, general exam reading lists, collections of syllabi, novels or plays, museum exhibitions, pieces of campaign literature, legal decisions, legislative debates, or any other phenomenon that enables political scientists to reconfigure settled understandings and focus on new questions or arguments.
  
  
• Reflecting on conceptual developments within political science in order to show how the study of politics and power has changed, whether for better or worse. Authors may trace the development (or distortion) of a crucial concept or theory, perhaps across several generations of scholars; examples include theories of racial formation, pluralism, modernization, political economy, political culture, or justice. Senior authors might reflect on their earlier work, noting what they would have written differently had they known then what they know now. Younger scholars can discuss the relevance of "classic" works to their current scholarship.
  
  
• Reflecting on conceptual links and divergences across space rather than across time. How is an idea such as rights, gender, democracy, the market, or security used differently in different countries, political parties, epistemological frameworks, or social science disciplines? Why do these different usages matter for our understanding of politics?
  
  
• Taking on perennial unanswerable (or at least unanswered) questions about power and politics, and showing how political scientists can contribute to at least partial answers. How can political scientists make sense of sin and evil, or virtue and inspiration? Why did communism fall in most nations of the world and at a particular moment? What are the political implications of the huge movements of persons and capital around the world? Why do states repress or make war on people within their own borders? Why is capitalism closely associated with democracy? (This is, of course, a small sampling of potential topics.)
  
  
• Reflecting on how the knowledge generated by political scientists affects and is affected by academic and political infrastructures. Studies of libraries, foundations, university and college departments, or teaching priorities may shed light on how and why the study of some political phenomena has flourished or withered, or why some methods of analysis grow or disappear; they should also show how this affects our understanding of politics and power. A related question considers how knowledge produced by political scientists is used, or misused, by people outside the discipline and what types of knowledge policy makers, journalists, social scientists in related disciplines, and political activists wish academics would produce.

In short, what unites articles in Perspectives on Politics is that all political scientists and many public actors can learn from them. Nonspecialists will become aware of the most important research in a subfield and the most intriguing questions it opens up. For specialists, articles should lead to new questions about their ongoing research and teaching, new ideas about how to proceed, and new connections with other areas of the discipline or other disciplines. Scholars in related disciplines will see how they can use research on politics and power in their own work, and how they can contribute to our agendas. Political and policy actors will find their positions and proposals supported, challenged, and changed by evidence emerging from broad-based research; they too are welcomed as contributors. All of us will learn more about why and how the discipline of political science matters.