PoliSci 2007-2008 Cycle

[Peter]

I completely agree that this is the mentality embraced by the academy.

But I would argue that the world has already been interpreted ad naseum, and furthermore the discipline seeks its players to interpret within the same confines, the same theories, etc. The result, generally, is neither new interpretation nor change.

Nonetheless, it is true that most academics want their jobs to be simply to think, interpret, and write. OK, but then what? It is expected that policymakers and the "doers" of the world will then read all the academics' musings and find ways to incorporate them into practice. This simply rarely happens. So, either we rag on the policymakers to be better educated and ask that they be able to perfectly interpret and apply "our brilliance" or we realize that we're only accomplishing half our job. Very well---our job is indeed to think. But that is only part of it. Who better to apply the grand theories than the people who created them? In other words, when will academics take the next step and ask themselves how their theories etc. could be applied... really?

The world is full of people who can point to this or that and say "This is wrong, it shouldn't be like this" but the real question is how you can take that truism and change the reality of the future. I believe in the potential of the academy to respond to the world not as an observer, but as a participant.

[eve2008]

I don't think all of us should necessarily get our hands dirty, but we should deign to actually communicate with, you know, real people every once in awhile. I really don't get why most academics don't speak directly to the public more often about their research, and why shady think tanks and journalists and pundits end up with most of the power to shape popular opinion.

Why didn't all the major civil war / "nation-building" / Iraq experts get directly involved in the debate to go to Iraq before we invaded? Why didn't they go on CNN? Write op-eds? Maybe there were a few, but I don't remember them. As an undergrad who had taken a small handful or poli sci classes, the outcome seemed obvious: it would be a long-term, hard-fought disaster. There is actually a science to these things...and we're about to become its newest acolytes.

[UMNdude]

I completely agree that this is the mentality embraced by the academy.

But I would argue that the world has already been interpreted ad naseum, and furthermore the discipline seeks its players to interpret within the same confines, the same theories, etc. The result, generally, is neither new interpretation nor change.

Nonetheless, it is true that most academics want their jobs to be simply to think, interpret, and write. OK, but then what? It is expected that policymakers and the "doers" of the world will then read all the academics' musings and find ways to incorporate them into practice. This simply rarely happens. So, either we rag on the policymakers to be better educated and ask that they be able to perfectly interpret and apply "our brilliance" or we realize that we're only accomplishing half our job. Very well---our job is indeed to think. But that is only part of it. Who better to apply the grand theories than the people who created them? In other words, when will academics take the next step and ask themselves how their theories etc. could be applied... really?

The world is full of people who can point to this or that and say "This is wrong, it shouldn't be like this" but the real question is how you can take that truism and change the reality of the future. I believe in the potential of the academy to respond to the world not as an observer, but as a participant.

Actually, as a "policymaker" and member of the US Intelligence Community, all academics need to do is think, interpret, and write. It is little known or recognized, but policymakers do read musings and incorporate them into practice. Many times a year, intel agencies hold conferences inviting scholars from all over to present. Often the direction of study and focus are solely shaped by the academy. One intel agency, for example, has recently established an entire division devoted to incorporating social constructivist methodology into US strategic thinking. It is quite awesome. Additionally, this division looks at how realist thought influenced decisions during the Cold War and how we can alter direction post Cold War.

But, I hate working in the community so that's why I am going to become a professor. :-)

[UMNdude]

This goes out to the other person who was admitted to UMass-Amherst and posted on the Results page...shoot me a message so we can chat.

[eve2008]

And Harvard professors testify before Congress. Blah blah blah.

I don't doubt the policy-making world is full of solutions; the problem is, politicians often ignore them in favor of other interests. This is why I think it's crucial to educate the public...

...which will still, years from now, believe the reason why the Shia and the Sunni are fighting a civil war is because we didn't have the right plan, not because state-building is a foolhardy idea...

p.s.

i love realism!

[UndraftedFreeAgent]

Why didn't all the major civil war / "nation-building" / Iraq experts get directly involved in the debate to go to Iraq before we invaded? Why didn't they go on CNN? Write op-eds? Maybe there were a few, but I don't remember them.

Because we went to war before any articles could make it through the peer review process. The media also did an admittedly poor job questioning the administration, which includes asking experts to comment. "The Economist" seems to do a better job of getting experts on the record than most other print news outlets.

[polisciapp]

I'll attempt to give a brief response that sums up why I'll be crushed if I don't get into a program that can place me in a TT position. But let me also preface this with saying that I don't want to become an obscure professor. I'm looking to launch a career as a public intellectual (e.g. Posner, Alan Wolfe, Mansfield)

To do that (at least to be on par with Posner), you'll have to graduate first in your class from U of C law school, write prolifically, be appointed to the Seventh Circuit, publish even more prolifically, and be extremely pretentious.

[zephyr]

I don't think all of us should necessarily get our hands dirty, but we should deign to actually communicate with, you know, real people every once in awhile. I really don't get why most academics don't speak directly to the public more often about their research, and why shady think tanks and journalists and pundits end up with most of the power to shape popular opinion.

Why didn't all the major civil war / "nation-building" / Iraq experts get directly involved in the debate to go to Iraq before we invaded? Why didn't they go on CNN? Write op-eds? Maybe there were a few, but I don't remember them. As an undergrad who had taken a small handful or poli sci classes, the outcome seemed obvious: it would be a long-term, hard-fought disaster. There is actually a science to these things...and we're about to become its newest acolytes.

actually, there were a handful of profs who talked extensively about the dangers of the impending war - mearsheimer, walt, khalidi, ikenberry, etc...poli sci, history, conservatives, progressives. the problem is the media is basically structurally incapable of stopping any government march to war these days - the corporate model has basically killed the opportunity to really do strong investigative research, hence the debacle that was the coverage leading up to iraq. but i think iraq has actually caused academics to speak up far more frequently than before - admittedly, we're talking about starting from pathetically low numbers, but you know, at least they're getting the point now. however, as someone who studied the media and nationalism at the graduate level, i don't know if it will actually be enough to do anything. still, doesn't mean profs shouldn't do so.

[MissingVandyCandy]

To do that (at least to be on par with Posner), you'll have to graduate first in your class from U of C law school, write prolifically, be appointed to the Seventh Circuit, publish even more prolifically, and be extremely pretentious.

What can I say, I aim high? Though Posner is probably a bad example for me to have used. He works far too hard and is such a productive writer. I'd be happier being Christopher Hitchens, though he doesn't have a PhD, Posner is half as self-righteous as "The Hitch."

[JordanJames]

I just wanted to point out that our National Security Advisor at the time the war was launched was a poli sci professor.

Anyways, Peter, I see your point, but don't think that a person with a PhD is more qualified to take a position of power than others. We gain knowledge that is deep and narrow in a specific field, but we are not necessarily adept at handling a broad range of issues, delgating duties and managing others.

Also, the reason the media doesn't pay much attention to what professors say is because the majority of America finds academics to be boring. Media outlets will get better ratings with people who are well known, generals, and pundits who've been associated with people who are well known. So just because a professor would like to speak out about an issue doesn't mean he'll be given a forum with which to communicate his message. And even when he is given the forum he seeks, he won't have his soundbytes aired on media outlets all week, or month, or year.

[JordanJames]

What can I say, I aim high? Though Posner is probably a bad example for me to have used. He works far too hard and is such a productive writer. I'd be happier being Christopher Hitchens, though he doesn't have a PhD, Posner is half as self-righteous as "The Hitch."

There's no problem with aiming high. But, I'd like to see you reach the ranks of those you named without being self-righteous or pretentious. Now that would be a great accomplishment.

[Quarex]

Also, the reason the media doesn't pay much attention to what professors say is because the majority of America finds academics to be boring. Media outlets will get better ratings with people who are well known, generals, and pundits who've been associated with people who are well known. So just because a professor would like to speak out about an issue doesn't mean he'll be given a forum with which to communicate his message. And even when he is given the forum he seeks, he won't have his soundbytes aired on media outlets all week, or month, or year.

I think the best way for us to truly reach the masses is to try to merge our academic goals and training with the exact mentality that generally keeps academics away from the public eye. In other words, we need to try to condense our own work into insultingly banal sound-bite tripe and publicize it as heavily as possible.

It also will likely not hurt if we all spend a little of our precious research time working out and getting a tan. A large part of the reason some of the most brilliant people in the country never end up talking about issues on television is because they are nightmarish abominations of flesh. Well, maybe not that bad. But having a non-professorial appearance (i.e. a relatively conservative haircut, avoiding tweed jackets with patches, coordinating colors, etc.) will likely go a long way toward bridging the gap!

(There is plenty of sarcasm here, but I really have spent some time thinking about how to best fulfill the duties of a professor without falling into the stereotype of the absent-minded, ill-dressed, eccentric genius.)

[eve2008]

Also, the reason the media doesn't pay much attention to what professors say is because the majority of America finds academics to be boring. Media outlets will get better ratings with people who are well known, generals, and pundits who've been associated with people who are well known. So just because a professor would like to speak out about an issue doesn't mean he'll be given a forum with which to communicate his message. And even when he is given the forum he seeks, he won't have his soundbytes aired on media outlets all week, or month, or year.

It's really *not* that hard to get on TV or the radio. I've done op-ed stuff and commentary before. I think most academics a) don't know how aren't that interested or c) aren't particularly effective communicators. But that's something that can change.

And there's definitely a rush from knowing that something you have written or said is being consumed by an audience of hundreds of thousands (or millions).

One of the best ways to increase your visibility is to start a blog. Then, when a journalist is looking for someone to cite or interview, there's a decent chance Google will bring them to your website. A few academics do blog. More should!

[JordanJames]

It's really *not* that hard to get on TV or the radio. I've done op-ed stuff and commentary before. I think most academics a) don't know how aren't that interested or c) aren't particularly effective communicators. But that's something that can change.

And there's definitely a rush from knowing that something you have written or said is being consumed by an audience of hundreds of thousands (or millions).

One of the best ways to increase your visibility is to start a blog. Then, when a journalist is looking for someone to cite or interview, there's a decent chance Google will bring them to your website. A few academics do blog. More should!

You're right, but making an impact on tv is hard. Getting interviewed by Wolf Blitzer for a minute and a half isn't going to do it, you need to constantly be on tv to get people's attention. But, I do like your enthusiasm and optimism, so I'm not going to argue with you. More power to you, and you're right, academics should be conveying messages directly to the people when they are qualified to discuss an issue.

As for me, I was on television once and nearly fell out of my chair. I don't think I'll ever do it again.

[eve2008]

I don't know. Seymour Hirsch wrote an article in the New Yorker once and for 3 days everyone thought we were going to war with Iran.

I wrote an article that got returned 10,000+ google hits (i.e., people writing about it on their blogs) in the first 48 hours. The Black Eyed Peas Obama video has been viewed 20 million times or whatever on YouTube. That's what media is today. I am not saying that any one thing your write or television appearance you make will change the course of history, but you will change minds and you will inspire people. And that isn't optimism; it's my own direct experience.

Think bigger!

[Peter]

And I think, fundamentally, the root issue here is semi-ethical, semi-philosophical, and largely personal. The question is, once society has given you this education (and yes, some would protest that you "earn" it, but seriously, our lives are a million times easier than that of the average global citizen, and I've worked "very hard" with academics) are you responsible for giving back? And then, importantly, how can you best do that?

I think we've all heard the "our gift to the world is our profoundly brilliant musings" line, but I also think if we actually sit and consider it very few of us would believe that we couldn't go a bit further.

Given that I believe we've got one life (at times like this it would be easier to believe in reincarnation, eh? the problems of this world are too deep, too tangible, and too prevalent to ignore. People are too real, journal articles are too distant. Not living amidst the problem doesn't make it not exist to me. Nor, hopefully, to any of us. Academia has made itself borderline irrelevant in the lives of most citizens and policymakers alike, and so obviously what is currently being done is insufficient.

One of my theory profs once asked me why I was this way---why in the entire graduate seminar, I'd be the only one bothered that Hannah Arendt didn't take her writing a step further and let us know what we could do, etc., to make "it" better. I told him that I guess someone, somewhere down the line, told me I could change the world. And I believed them.

I wish more of us did.

A friend of mine found this quote on some Berkeley student's blog. I'm probably butchering it, but it's something like this: "There are people the world over who if you knew them you would love. And having loved them, you would pay dearly to see their lives bettered. That we may never meet them does not change anything." -Brian Loo

[eve2008]

A friend of mine found this quote on some Berkeley student's blog. I'm probably butchering it, but it's something like this: "There are people the world over who if you knew them you would love. And having loved them, you would pay dearly to see their lives bettered. That we may never meet them does not change anything." -Brian Loo

that is f-ing beautiful

[rollinson]

Man, you people are all so serious: I just want to get a PHD so I can become a Professor and use my status and aura of wisdom to bed 18 year olds. Knowledge, smoledge!

[MissingVandyCandy]

Rollinson you are truly a gentleman and a scholar. Wise beyond your years sir. I give your post a triple recommendation and anoint you chair of freshman advising.

[slickj07]

I also think certain decision-makers at the top for the iraq war weren't exactly interested in outside or contrasting opinions, either. Such is the way of a pyramidally organized executive (and with a leader who doesn't know a whole lot about history and world politics influenced by guys who he trusts completely who already had made up their minds).

[futureprof]

Hey guys/gals- does anybody know when the University of Southern California (USC) recruiting weekend is? I need to know b4 making commitments to visit other schools. I hope to hear from them soon (with a yes of course)- but the sooner I know when their recruiting weekend is the sooner I can get back to other programs about their weekends. Thanks for *any* info at all!

ps. personal message me w/ anything you wouldn't want to put in the forum.

[Peter]

Hi futureprof--

I haven't heard from USC yet myself, but honestly, even if there is a conflict, I'd go to your other two visits. I think you'd have more opportunities, more supported research, greater placement odds, etc. at your other two admits.

[grtgmeloser]

Hey futureprof,

The USC POIR recruiting event is March 10-11. The email from the graduate director mentioned that they accepted 10% of 130 total applicants. Emails starting going out Friday. USC will cover up to $600 for airfare, in addition to lodgings and incidentals for admitted students to attend the recruiting event. Hope that helps.

[Quarex]

A friend of mine found this quote on some Berkeley student's blog. I'm probably butchering it, but it's something like this: "There are people the world over who if you knew them you would love. And having loved them, you would pay dearly to see their lives bettered. That we may never meet them does not change anything." -Brian Loo

That really is a great quote. It sounds like something I have been trying and failing to articulate properly for a long time. Spending a significant part of your childhood living in random countries and meeting people who most of your peers will never even know exist is particularly eye-opening.

You and I have to compare notes again in a few years once we see how well this whole "walking out of the ivory tower to the cobblestone path" approach works.

[eve2008]

I also think certain decision-makers at the top for the iraq war weren't exactly interested in outside or contrasting opinions, either. Such is the way of a pyramidally organized executive (and with a leader who doesn't know a whole lot about history and world politics influenced by guys who he trusts completely who already had made up their minds).

They didn't give two sh**s. Good advice was readily available. They ignored for the sake of an agenda.

Lucky for them, a sizable minority of the public was rabid for war.

But that's why, as I've said, I'm not really concerned about the leadership--they will seek out expert opinion, or not, depending on their own whims and prerogatives.

I'm saying we should engage directly with and educate the public...