******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
Best regards, Andrew Stewart Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <h-rev...@lists.h-net.org> > Date: February 9, 2019 at 7:41:57 AM EST > To: h-rev...@lists.h-net.org > Cc: H-Net Staff <revh...@mail.h-net.org> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-Diplo]: Quince on Blatt, 'Race and the Making of > American Political Science' > Reply-To: h-rev...@lists.h-net.org > > Jessica Blatt. Race and the Making of American Political Science. > American Governance: Politics, Policy, and Public Law Series. > Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018. 205 pp. > $55.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8122-5004-6. > > Reviewed by Vanessa E. Quince (University of Washington) > Published on H-Diplo (February, 2019) > Commissioned by Seth Offenbach > > In Race and the Making of American Political Science, Jessica Blatt > demonstrates how race was crucial in the formation and development of > American political science. Rather than suggesting that race lay > outside of mainstream political science, Blatt argues that race was > at its core. Starting from John W. Burgess in the early nineteenth > century to Charles Merriam in the early twentieth century, Blatt > shows how ideas and conceptions concerning racial difference shaped > the expansion of political science as a field of study in the academy > to the articulation of different methodologies within the field. One > of the most compelling aspects of this text is Blatt's discussion of > the role of racial difference both within and outside of the United > States. That is, for academics to understand the significance of race > domestically, we have to understand how race was also important > internationally, as scholars and practitioners alike were seeking to > find solutions and policies for US imperialism abroad. > > Blatt's text is particularly timely given the prominence of identity > politics in the academy. Her text forces us to question the ways in > which political scientists have used race as an explanatory variable > to understand political phenomena. One of the most pressing questions > that political scientists have tried to address since the field's > founding in the nineteenth century to today is: why do ethnic > minorities have different political behavior from their white > counterparts, all else equal_? _The answers have both theoretical and > empirical implications. For example, we need to go beyond race as > significance stars in a regression table and spend more time > disentangling possible explanations underlying the patterns we see. > > In part 1 of the book (chapters 1 through 4), Blatt demonstrates how > race was central to the development of the field. From Reconstruction > to imperialism in the Philippines, the management of nonwhite > populations at home and abroad were on the minds of the > first-starters of the field. Part 2 (chapters 5 and 6) moves away > from the establishment of the field to the actual development of > political science, in terms of different methodologies and > theoretical paradigms. Blatt carefully traces and discusses > conversations, texts, studies, literature, and memos from political > scientists to show how their thoughts concerning race and racial > difference helped to shape (and still influence) how we study > political science today. > > From the onset and throughout many parts of the book, Blatt centers > the role of Burgess in making political science a field of social > inquiry. She gives special attention to his theory of Teutonism, > where the state was the natural unit of analysis and the racial > homogeneity of the state was crucial to its development. For Burgess, > the implications of this ideology were that the Aryan race was highly > political while Asia and Africa were composed of unpolitical nations. > Burgess's understanding of political science was to argue that there > was a natural order of things and according to Blatt, he made these > arguments to justify how and why political science was a field > uniquely different from those who philosophized about an ideal world. > While Blatt presents these ideologies in juxtaposition with one > another, it seems like the political implications for racial > minorities amounted to the same. In the _Racial Contract _(1997), > Charles Mills argues that ancient philosophers were not concerned > with the rights of nonwhite people. Therefore, whether or not rights > are natural or ideal, for Burgess as the leading political scientist > of the time, or the philosophers he references, nonwhite people were > not presumed capable. Furthermore, as Blatt notes, while some of the > founders of political science were not outright committed to white > supremacy, race-based science satisfied other demands. This > discussion led me to question the centrality of Burgess in this text > overall. I began to doubt if the story of political science would > have developed differently without Burgess, and ask whether the > development of political science (and race in political science) > merely reflected the fact that it was primarily white men who had a > seat at the table. > > I think the greatest strength of this book is how the author > discusses the tenuous nature of political science as a natural > science versus a social science--particularly, how some natural > scientists, such as Robert Yerkes and Carl Brigham, turned to > empiricism in the form of intelligence testing to help prove > differences between the races. Ultimately, these problematic findings > helped influence policy in the form of the Johnson Reed Act, which > limited immigration into the US in 1924. On the other end of the > spectrum, Blatt discusses the reception of anthropologist Franz > Boas's work on cultural relativism and its influences on the field > and race-based science. Throughout this thorough discussion, Blatt > never fails to weave in the centrality of race in the shifting nature > of the field. In all, individuals' prior ideologies concerning race > ultimately shaped how these new findings and research were received. > > _Race and the Making of American Political Science_ is a necessary > read for scholars interested in the role of race in political > science, both for theorists and political methodologists alike. In > contrast to Robert Vitalis's _White World Order, Black Power > Politics: The Birth of American International Relations _(2015), > which centers on white efforts at silencing black political > scientists and their contributions in the field, Blatt centers the > role of white political scientists in the development of race-based > science. Blatt shows the centrality and continuity in which > conversations about race took place within the academy. From > beginning to the present, she shows how race and the changing ideas > about race have shaped the field of political science and in doing > so, she makes one think about the implications for political science > in the future. This is a must read for everyone. > > Citation: Vanessa E. Quince. Review of Blatt, Jessica, _Race and the > Making of American Political Science_. H-Diplo, H-Net Reviews. > February, 2019. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=53055 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
