Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T23:24:15.744Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Observations on the Transformation of the Political Science Community in Post-Soviet Russia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Helen Shestopal*
Affiliation:
Moscow State University

Extract

For at least the past decade, the international political science community has been debating the state of the discipline, the level of its maturity, and the challenges to it from realpolitik (Goodin and Klingemann 1996, chap. 1). One of the most serious challenges came from the implosion of the USSR and subsequent transformation of political systems in Russia and Eastern Europe. Political scientists appeared unable to predict these global changes or to elaborate explanatory models of current processes. Applications of classic models to the new democracies has proven insufficient. This puts a problem of universality versus national specificity of political science on the agenda (Lecca 1997).

For Russian political scientists, this problem has some specific implications. First, the practice of political science is determined by its object—politics. It is well-known that perestroika, which started more than ten years ago, had no clear aims but was guided by the intuitive desire of Russia's political elite to modernize the country. Russian leaders wished to modernize the country by remaking the government in the model of a Western democratic system. But neither in the late 1980s nor now have political scientists or politicians worked out any clear means for achieving such a transition.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

An earlier version of this paper was delivered at the Eighteenth World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Boston, September 1–4, 1998.

References

Amelin, V.N., and Degtyarev, A.A.. 1997. “Political Sociology in Russia: The Origins and Contemporary State of the Discipline.” World of Russia: Sociology, Ethnology, Cultural Studies 1.Google Scholar
Amelin, V.N., and Degtyarev, A.A.. 1998. “The Development of Applied Political Science in Russia.” Polis 3:157–79.Google Scholar
Brown, A. 1986. “Political Science in the USSR.” International Political Science Review 7(October): 449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, David M. 1998. “Political Consultancy Overseas: The Internalization of Campaign Consultancy.” PS: Political Science and Politics 31(June): 171–79.Google Scholar
Goodin, R., H.-D., Klingemann 1996. New Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gorshkov, M. 1998. “The Face of Russian Political Science.” Nezavisimayz Gazeta 3.Google Scholar
Graziano, L. 1996. “The Vote for the State Duma: A Report from Russia.” Participation 20(Spring): 710.Google Scholar
Leca, J. 1997. “The Enduring Dialogue of Conflict and Order in a Changing World: Political Science at the Turn of the Century.” Presidential Address to the Seventeenth World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Seoul.Google Scholar
Pantin, I.K. 1997. “Formation of Political Science in Russia and the Journal Polis .” Cosopolis.Google Scholar
Pliays, J.A. 1998. “Russian Political Science: State of the Discipline and Problems of Its Development.” Polis 2.Google Scholar
Shestopal, Helen, 1997a. “Separation of Powers in Contemporary Russia: Political and Psychological Aspects.” Presented at the roundtalbe “Division of Powers as a Challenge in Contemporary Democracies: Executive/Legislative; Judiciary Relations,” Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
Shestopal, Helen. 1997b. “Teaching Politics in Russian Universities.” Participation 21 (Spring): 48 Google Scholar