Political Junk Science and its Geeks

[fastpat]

It's articles like this that make my day more pleasant.

Political Junk Science and its Geeks
by Darian Worden
dw1776@hotmail.com

Exclusive to TLE

I am majoring in history and political science, and I'm very glad to be finished with the political science requirement. Every class I took for that subject I ended up disliking by the end of the semester. By the time that I realized they would all suck, I was almost done with my polisci requirement so I just finished it.

So what was so bad about political science classes? The political part of them.

Political Science 101 featured an obnoxious socialist whose lectures were apparently prime time for him to drop names of impressive sounding political works he was supremely familiar with, and to tell students exactly how capitalism ruins everything it touches and which kinds of socialism might save us.

During one lecture (I don't remember how it came up, but I think the topic of the day was capitalism) a student responded to one of his statements by saying something like "I guess you'd have to go to the Libertarians for that." The professor's response left me absolutely dumbfounded. I don't remember his exact words but I remember the idea. He said that the Libertarians were a very minor fringe group on the level of the Maoist Party, not really worth discussing.

Cue a Chris Griffin "wwwwWWWHHHHAAAAAAT?" That's right, the LP, "the largest third party in the United States, with over 200,000 registered voters and over 600 people in office" is about as big, popular, and influential as the American Maoist movement.

Things were different in other classes, not necessarily better though. I don't recall hearing the word "libertarian" in any of my later courses except for a Congressional Politics class in which the professor would often rattle off the names of several political parties when he wanted to make a point that certain things applied to all parties.

Then there was Introduction to Political Science Methods, which was about statistical methods used in political science research. In this class we learned all about how to correlate people into numerical scales that often ranged from "very liberal" to "very conservative" or "very Democratic" to "very Rebublican." Yup, no place for a libertarian, except for maybe "centrist." Believing in liberty, it appears, is a mathematical impossibility.

This shouldn't really be surprising. In most political science classes, questions regarding the proper role of government almost never boil down to whether or not certain actions would fall under the proper role of government. Rather, it is assumed that government has a legitimate role in deciding nearly everything, and determining "the proper role of government" is all about figuring out the proper way for government to intervene. Now I don't remember the actual phrase "the proper role of government" being brought up in this manner; I'm simply using it here as tool to illuminate how political science classes often worked: everything was based on the unspoken assumption that some kind of invasive state action is necessary.
More: http://www.ncc-1776.org/

[Moneyguy1]

Why would someone major in political science? I can see a course or two for widening one's scope, but wouldn't an MPA be a bit more useful in the public sector?.

[dhoward]

Originally posted by Moneyguy1
Why would someone major in political science? I can see a course or two for widening one's scope, but wouldn't an MPA be a bit more useful in the public sector?.

Because you're pretty sure you couldn't make it in the real world?

[Moneyguy1]

By word of a PolySci grad...."You want fries......?"

[fastpat]

Frankly, it's none of your business why he's majoring in one field, or another, it's his philosophical ideas that are important.

[dhoward]

Originally posted by fastpat
Frankly, it's none of your business why he's majoring in one field, or another, it's his philosophical ideas that are important.

If it's none of our business, why post?

[fastpat]

Originally posted by dhoward
If it's none of our business, why post?

For you, there is no apparent reason. Since you don't know the answer, this is one that you'll have to learn from someone else.

[dhoward]

Originally posted by fastpat
For you, there is no apparent reason. Since you don't know the answer, this is one that you'll have to learn from someone else.

You are truly not capable of carrying on a conversation, are you?
Whenever pressed, you simply dismiss with a wave of your glove.
Whatever would you do if you dropped a sponge?

[Moneyguy1]

Pat...The entire article is one persons OPINION. I'm willing to bet that there were others in those classes who saw it completely in a different light. We hear what we want to and tend to ignore the rest.

The question remains: Why bother if your professors are simply going to give you agita?

Lighten up, fer crying out loud.

P.S. It reads like an undergraduate weekly assignment.