DOCSLIB.ORG

(January 2018) Curriculum Vitae TERENCE BALL Address Office

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(January 2018) Curriculum Vitae TERENCE BALL Address Office (January 2018) Curriculum Vitae TERENCE BALL Address Office: Department of Political Science tel.: (602) 431-9364 Arizona State University fax: (480) 965-3929 Tempe, AZ 85287 - 3902 E-mail: [email protected] Home: 4609 E. Ardmore Drive Phone: (602) 431-9364 Phoenix, AZ 85044 Personal: U.S. Citizen; married; two grown sons Education Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, 1973 M.A., University of California, Berkeley, 1968 B.A., summa cum laude, University of California, Santa Cruz, 1967 Honors, Awards, Offices and Appointments [partial listing] Editorial Board, Power in Politics and Political Theory, 4 vols., eds. Mark Haugaard and Stewart Clegg (Sage, 2014) Obama Scholars mentor, Sept. 2009 - 2011 Invited to be Wakonse Teaching Fellow (March 2008; declined) ASU "Professor of the Year" award finalist (April 2006) Editor-in-Chief, Cambridge Dictionary of Political Thought (2006 - present) Series Editor, Studies in the History of Political Thought, Amsterdam: Brill Publishers (2006 - ) Shortlisted among three finalists in national search for new Editor of Political Theory, July-September 2004 Designated as "Target of Excellence" and interviewed for professorship at the University of California - Santa Cruz, 30-31 January 2003; offer aborted because of Calif. fiscal crisis. Graham Wallas Chair, London School of Economics (finalist; interviewed in London 27 April 1998) Hired as "Target of Opportunity" at Arizona State University, 1998 Vanderbilt University Professorship, offer extended July 1995; declined Oberlin College, Robert S. Danforth Chair of Government (endowed professorial chair); offer extended March 1988; declined Visiting Fellow, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge University, Michaelmas (Fall) term, 2004 Adjunct Research Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Political Ideologies, Oxford University, Michaelmas term, 2004. 2 Invited to spend Winter-Spring 2005 as Harsanyi Visiting Research Fellow in the Social and Political Theory Program at the Research School of Social Science at Australian National University (declined) Keeley-Rutherford Fellow, Wadham College, Oxford University, Michaelmas term, 1998 Visiting Fellow, Corpus Christi College, Oxford, Trinity (Spring) Term, 1995 Fowler Hamilton Fellow, Christ Church, Oxford, Trinity Term, 1993 Visiting Fellow, Nuffield College, Oxford, 1978-79 Visiting Professor, University of California, San Diego (Winter and Spring terms, 1984) Visiting Lecturer, Universities of Stockholm and Uppsala (Autumn 1975, Spring 1979, December 1984, and March 1988) Summer Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Summer 1977 Editorial Board, American Journal of Political Science (1996-2002) Editorial Board, Journal of Political Ideologies (1994 - ) Editorial Board, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (2002 - ) Editorial Board, Contributions to the History of Concepts (2004 - 2011) Editorial Board, Journal of Political Power (2007 – ) Editorial Board, British Journal of Political Science (2015 - ) Juror for the Harrison Prize for 2004-05 awarded by the British Political Studies Association Chair, Heinz Eulau Award Committee, American Political Science Association (1998-99) Chair, Easton Award Committee, Foundations of Political Thought (1997-98) Chair, Lippincott Award Committee, APSA (1997-98) Chair, Spitz Prize Committee, Conference for the Study of Political Thought (1996-2003) Public Ethics Scholar, Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics, ASU, 2001 Scholar of the College, University of Minnesota, 1995-1998 (elected 1995 for three years of research support) McKnight Research Fellowship, 1993-1996 (three years of financial support for research and travel) Reappraising Political Theory named "Outstanding Academic Book of 1995" by Choice (January 1996) Executive Steering Committee, Center for the Study of Religion and Conflict, Arizona State University, 2003 - Board of Directors, Madeline Island Wilderness Preserve, 1991-1999 Fellow, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, D.C., September - December 1987 Bush Foundation Sabbatical Fellowship, January - December 1988 NEH Fellowship for Individual Research, 1978-79 Section organizer (Political Theory), Western Political Science Association meeting, San Jose, CA, 24-26 March 2000. Co-organizer (with J.G.A. Pocock) of Constitutional Bicentenary conference on "Conceptual Change and the Constitution of the United States," The Folger Institute Center, Washington, D.C., 16-18 April 1987 APSA Section Organizer (Analytical Political Philosophy), 1985 APSA meeting, New Orleans Area Convenor, Conference for the Study of Political Thought, 1980-present 3 Executive Council, Conference for the Study of Political Thought, 1980-present Board of Directors and Executive Council, AAACC (American Association for Advancement of Core Curriculum) 1989-1993 Chair, GRE Test-Design Committee, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, 1978-1982 Member of NEH/APSA "Ethical Issues" Seminar, New York (March 1980) and Washington (August 1980) Graduate School Summer Research Grants (1980 and 1990) Advisor, U.S. State Department, Foreign Service Institute (1980- 82) Contributing Editor, Minnesota Daily, 1986-1992 Single-Quarter Leaves (1975, 1983, 1993) Macmillan Travel Grants (1975, 1983, 1993) Chancellor's Prize, University of California (1967) Ford Foundation Special Career Fellowship (graduate), U.C. Berkeley, 1967-72 (5 years' full funding) University Scholarship (undergraduate) Phi Beta Kappa B.A. summa cum laude, 1967 Dissertation: Laws and Explanation in Political Science (Berkeley, 1973) Ph.D. Examination Fields: POLITICAL THEORY, American Politics, Political Behavior Teaching Positions: University of Minnesota Assistant Professor, 1972-75; tenured and promoted to Associate Professor, 1975; Professor, 1981-98. University of California - San Diego, Visiting Professor, 1984. Arizona State University, Professor, 1998-present. Teaching Fields: European and American Political Theory; Conceptual History; Analytical Political Philosophy; History and Philosophy of the Social Sciences; Ethics, Law and Public Policy; Environmental Ethics and Political Theory. Courses Taught: Undergraduate: Ancient, Early Modern, and Recent Political Thought (three courses); American Political Thought; Democratic Theory; Contemporary Political Ideologies; Introduction to Political Analysis; Ethics and Public Policy; Ethics and the Environment; team-taught "Garbage, Government and the Globe", a 5-college cooperative course; Honors Research Seminar; Contemporary Controversies in Ethics and Politics. Graduate: History of Political Thought, Analytical Political Philosophy, Marxism and Neo-Marxism, Theory and 4 Practice, Liberalism, American Political Thought, Critical Theory, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Jurisprudence, Environmental Ethics and Green Political Theory, Political Theory "Core" Seminar Administrative Experience ASU: Academic Senate; CLAS Senate; acting chair, Student-Faculty Policy Committee; Chair's Advisory Committee; Graduate Committee; Chair of Department Chair Search Committee; Septennial Review Committee; chair, search committee, IT faculty position; Executive Steering Committee, Center for the Study of Religion and Conflict; CLAS Curriculum Committee. Minnesota: Director of Honors; CLA Honors Committee; Political Theory sub-field chair; Director of Undergraduate Studies; Faculty, Summer Honors College; Merit Advisory Committee; Graduate School General Research Advisory Committee (5-year term); Chair, Grievance Committee; Chair, Related Facilities Committee; University of Minnesota Press Publications Committee (5-year term); College of Liberal Arts, Committee on Languages and Culture; Executive Committee, American Studies Program; Human Subjects Committee; Graduate Work Committee; editor, Alumni Newsletter; Adjunct Faculty, American Studies Program and Center For Advanced Feminist Studies; CLA Committee on Composition and Communication; and others. Publications I. Books, Monographs, Articles, and Chapters in Edited Volumes 2017 (2017a) “Mill on Psychology, Associationism, and Ethology,” in A Companion to John Stuart Mill, eds. Christopher Macleod and Dale Miller (London and New York: John Wiley & Sons), pp. 145-59. (2017b) Political Ideologies and the Democratic Ideal, 10th revised edition, with Richard Dagger and Daniel O’Neill (London and New York: Routledge). (2017c) Ideals and Ideologies: A Reader, 10th revised edition, edited with Richard Dagger and Daniel O’Neill (London and New York: Routledge). (2017d) “Was There a Berkeley School of Political Theory?” Symposium in PS: Political Science & Politics, 50: 3 (July), pp. 789-91. (2017e) “Partido,” in Pensar la Modernidad Politica: Propuestas Desde la Nueva Historia Politica [Political Thought of Modernity: Proposals from the New Political History] 5 (Mexico City: Instituto de Investigationes Dr. Jose Maria Luis Mora), pp. 387-414; Spanish translation of 1989c. 2016 (2016a) “The Higher Illiteracy: Core Curriculum as Cure and Corrective,” Academic Questions, 29: 1(Spring 2016), pp. 68-76. (2016b-c) Encyclopedia of American Governance, eds. Stephen Schechter, et al (New York: Macmillan), two entries: “Liberty,” vol. III, pp. 203-06 (2,500 words) “Republican Virtue,” vol. IV, pp. 295-97 (1,800 words) 2015 (2015a) “The American Founders’ New Science of Politics,” in Scientific Statesmanship, Governance, and the History of Political Philosophy, eds. Kyriakos N. Demetriou and Antis Loizides (London and New York: Routledge), pp. 152- 73.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The John U. Nef Committee on Social Thought 1
    The John U. Nef Committee on Social Thought 1 The John U. Nef Committee on Social Thought Department Website: http://socialthought.uchicago.edu Chair • Robert Pippin Professors • Lorraine Daston • Wendy Doniger • Joel Isaac • Hans Joas • Gabriel Lear • Jonathan Lear • Jonathan Levy • Jean Luc Marion • Heinrich Meier • Glenn W. Most • David Nirenberg • Thomas Pavel • Mark Payne • Robert B. Pippin • Jennifer Pitts • Andrei Pop • Haun Saussy • Laura Slatkin • Nathan Tarcov • Rosanna Warren • David Wellbery Emeriti • Wendy Doniger • Leon Kass • Joel Kraemer • Ralph Lerner • James M. Redfield • David Tracy About the Committee The John U. Nef Committee on Social Thought was established as a degree granting body in 1941 by the historian John U. Nef (1899-1988), with the assistance of the economist Frank Knight, the anthropologist Robert Redfield, and Robert M. Hutchins, then President of the University. The Committee is a group of diverse scholars sharing a common concern for the unity of the human sciences. Their premises were that the serious study of any academic topic, or of any philosophical or literary work, is best prepared for by a wide and deep acquaintance with the fundamental issues presupposed in all such studies, that students should learn about these issues by acquainting themselves with a select number of classic ancient and modern texts in an inter- disciplinary atmosphere, and should only then concentrate on a specific dissertation topic. It accepts qualified graduate students seeking to pursue their particular studies within this broader context, and aims both to teach precision of scholarship and to foster awareness of the permanent questions at the origin of all learned inquiry.
    [Show full text]
  • FOREWORD to the PRINCETON CLASSICS EDITION Politics And
    FOREWORD TO THE PRINCETON CLASSICS EDITION ••• Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Political Thoughtis both one and two books, written by both one and two political theorists. A changed world and changed thinker divides the 1960 edition from the 2004 expanded edition, the latter now ap- pearing as a Princeton Classic. First published when Sheldon S. Wolin was a young Berkeley professor, Politics and Vision quickly rose to prominence for its luminous interpretations of canoni- cal theorists and probing reflections on the shifting meaning and status of politics and political theory across Western history. A scholarly work of breathtaking scope composed in accessible literary cadences, it was exemplary of what Wolin would term “political theory as a vocation” in his 1969 essay by that name.1 Intentionally recalling Max Weber’s stipulations for scholarship and political leadership in his “Vocations” essays, and especially Weber’s contrast between career and calling, Wo- lin’s formulation of theory as a vocation distinguished political theory’s classic value from current disciplinary conventions. He sought especially to reestablish political theory’s longstanding concerns with res publicae and res gestae—concerns he termed as “irreducible and natural to the political theorist as a concern for health is to the physician.”2 With its immense erudition and close readings trained on the problematic of “the political,” Politics and Vision embodied Wolin’s insistence on political theory as “pri- marily a civic and secondarily an academic activity…a critical engagement with col- lective existence and with the political experiences of power to which it gives rise.”3 This tasking of political theory invites the sort of reading Wolin frequently performed when he taught.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Citizenship in the Age of Waning Democracy: Wolin and Balibar on Citizenship, the Political and Dedemocratization
    Citizenship Studies ISSN: 1362-1025 (Print) 1469-3593 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccst20 The ‘I’ and the ‘we’ of citizenship in the age of waning democracy: Wolin and Balibar on citizenship, the political and dedemocratization Robin Rodd To cite this article: Robin Rodd (2018): The ‘I’ and the ‘we’ of citizenship in the age of waning democracy: Wolin and Balibar on citizenship, the political and dedemocratization, Citizenship Studies To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2018.1449812 Published online: 12 Mar 2018. Submit your article to this journal View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ccst20 CITIZENSHIP STUDIES, 2018 https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2018.1449812 The ‘I’ and the ‘we’ of citizenship in the age of waning democracy: Wolin and Balibar on citizenship, the political and dedemocratization Robin Rodd Discipline of Anthropology, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Despite drawing on different historical traditions and philosophical Received 16 September 2017 sources, Sheldon Wolin and Étienne Balibar have come to see Accepted 18 February 2018 citizenship and democracy in fundamentally similar ways. However, KEYWORDS the work of one has not been considered alongside that of the other. In Balibar; Wolin; citizenship; this paper, I examine some of their key texts and draw out three areas of democratization; common concern: the historical specificity of the political, citizenship dedemocratization; demos; as a dialectical process and dedemocratization. The significance of equality Wolin and Balibar’s writing on citizenship and democracy lies in a set of proposals for the eternal rebirth of the citizen as democratic agent between action and institution, hierarchy and equality, individual and community, difference and the universal.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the 2017 Edition
    Introduction to the 2017 Edition Sheldon Wolin was our most important contemporary political theorist. He gave us a modern vocabulary to describe our decayed democracy and the poi- sonous effects of empire. He was a scholar who detested orthodoxies, rooted his understanding of democracy in the ancient concept of the Athenian demos and believed, like Max Weber, that politics was a vocation. Ralph Nader gave me Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism when it first came out in 2008. Nader, who has been fighting the abuse of corporate power longer and with perhaps more success than any other American, called it a “masterpiece.” Wolin cap- tured the political mutations caused by neoliberalism and coined the term “inverted totalitarianism” for the novel political and economic system it had spawned. He foresaw that this system of inverted totalitarianism would, as it has, eventually crush or hollow out our democratic institutions and give rise to an authoritarian or even totalitarian regime. Inverted totalitarianism is different from classical forms of totalitarianism. It does not find its expression in a demagogue or charismatic leader but in the faceless anonymity of the corporate state. Inverted totalitarianism pays out- ward fealty to the facade of electoral politics, the Constitution, civil liberties, freedom of the press, the independence of the judiciary, and the iconography, traditions and language of American patriotism, but it has effectively seized all of the mechanisms of power to render the citizen impotent. “Unlike the Nazis, who made life uncertain for the wealthy and privileged while providing social programs for the working class and poor, inverted totali- tarianism exploits the poor, reducing or weakening health programs and social services, regimenting mass education for an insecure workforce threatened by the importation of low- wage workers,” Wolin wrote.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Theory
    Democratic Theory Government 6645 (Spring 2016) Professor Jason Frank Cornell University White Hall 307 W 4:30-6:30 [email protected] White Hall 114 Office Hours: W 1:30-3:30 Course description Democracy, once commonly derided as the worst of all regimes, is now just as often proclaimed the universal source of modern political legitimacy. There is little agreement, however, over what democracy means or how it is best embodied in state institutions and law. This seminar will attempt to bring these disagreements into conceptual focus by introducing students to select debates in contemporary democratic theory over the meaning of democracy and the normative scope and limitations of contemporary democratic practice. Beginning with the early modern history of popular sovereignty and ending with contemporary debates over democracy and neoliberalism, we will explore (but not limit ourselves to) the following questions: How do democratic theorists and democratic actors negotiate the paradoxes of collective self-rule? Is democratic theory an empirical or normative inquiry, or does it destabilize this very opposition? Who is the agent of democratic politics? How should we understand the interaction between formal democratic institutions and political culture? What is the relationship between liberalism and democracy? Do rights (as protections of individual liberty not subject to revision by majority rule) suspend democracy or establish its necessary preconditions? Is democracy premised on a unitary political identity and, if so, how does it accommodate or recognize difference? Is democracy best understood as a form of government or a practice of resistance to domination? What do we expect from democratic theory and how should we understand the relationship between democratic theory and democratic practice? Course Requirements This is a political theory graduate seminar.
    [Show full text]
  • The Promise of Mourning
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations Dissertations and Theses March 2015 The Promise of Mourning Samantha Rose Hill University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2 Part of the Political Theory Commons Recommended Citation Hill, Samantha Rose, "The Promise of Mourning" (2015). Doctoral Dissertations. 304. https://doi.org/10.7275/6461835.0 https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2/304 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations and Theses at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE PROMISE OF MOURNING A Dissertation Presented by SAMANTHA ROSE HILL Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY February 2015 Department of Political Science © Copyright by Samantha Rose Hill 2015 All Rights Reserved THE PROMISE OF MOURNING A Dissertation Presented by SAMANTHA ROSE HILL Approved as to style and content by: _________________________________________ Nicholas Xenos, Chair _________________________________________ Angelica Bernal, Member _________________________________________ Jonathan Skolnik, Member _________________________________________ Thomas Dumm, Member _________________________________________ Brian F. Schaffner, Department Chair Department of Political Science For Isabel Rose ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to my dissertation chair Nicholas Xenos for his constant support, for telling me that I could not write a dissertation on Hannah Arendt, and for introducing me to Jean Jacques Rousseau and Walter Benjamin, who will always remain with me. I am very thankful to Thomas Dumm for his generous mentorship, guidance, and encouragement.
    [Show full text]
  • Dewey and the Project of Critical Social Theory*
    ..··:.:r.·.'· , DEWEY AND THE PROJECT OF CRITICAL ·,····.·.,·,·.·,1··,···",::·' :~ F. ~. r SOCIAL THEORY* ·',:1: ROBERT J. IZENT University of Kansas Social Thought & Research, 2000, Vol. 23, 1&2 Abstract The project of critical social theory shares with progressive (bllt not classical, free 1Harket) liberalism a value-orientation composed ofan egalitarian conception of socialjustice; a positive, delJelopmental vie1v of libertY as selfrealization; and a participatory notion of democracy. Differentiating critical theory fro»: all strains of liberalism is the comsction that capitalism cannot StljJport theinstitutionalieation of this value-orientation, and that tinder modern conditions onlY some form of democratic socialism can. Given thisualue-orientation, thispaperoutlines the mission and struaur: of theproject of critical theory. In its RJOSt recent retreat to the academy, practitioners have losttoud: not onlY 1vith its mission but also lvith the level ofhistorical specificity at wbicb the project can RIOSt effectivelY bepracticed. TIl/O proposals aresuggestedfor recoverilJg and executing its mission. Thefirst is to address citizens in particular societies about the mora! and political significance of contemporary social change. The second is that theory, description, critique, and vision should proceed at a level ofabstraction I callregi1lle analYsis. Here the object ofanalYsis is a specific society with its own history, institutionalfeatures; and cultura! identity. It is suggested that John Dewey': proposals for the retitalization of philosophy are relevant to the recovery of theproject of critical social theory. Following Dewf!Y j • For theirpatience and support over the years I wish to thank my friends Tom Skrtic, Bob Antonio, Mohamed El-Hodiri, Bardwell Smith, and the late Clifford Griffin. This work was supported in part by Grant No.
    [Show full text]
  • In Socialism's Twilight: Michael Walzer and the Politics of the Long New
    In Socialism’s Twilight: Michael Walzer and the Politics of the Long New Left David Marcus Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2019 ©2019 David Marcus All Rights Reserved Abstract “In Socialism’s Twilight: Michael Walzer and the Politics of the Long New Left” David Marcus In Socialism’s Twilight is a study of the thought and politics of Michael Walzer and the travails of “democratic socialism” in the second half of the twentieth century. Using the methods of intel- lectual and political history, it situates Walzer’s political theory and criticism in the context of what might be called the “long New Left,” the overlapping generations of radicals that stretched from the beginning of the Cold War to its end and that supplemented the left’s traditional com- mitments to socialism with a politics of national liberation, radical democracy, and liberalism. By doing so, the dissertation hopes to trace the development not only of Walzer’s own commit- ments but also those of the socialist left. Caught in a period of frequent defeat and bitter contro- versy, socialists found themselves forced into a state of constant revision, as they moved from the libertarian socialism of the 1950s and 60s to the social democratic coalitions of the 1970s and 80s to the liberalism and humanitarianism of the 1990s and 2000s. Opening with the collapse of the Popular Front after World War II, the study follows Walzer’s search for a new left with radi- cals around Dissent and through his involvement in civil rights and antiwar activism.
    [Show full text]
  • Extended Notes for Toward Democracy
    NOTES TO INTRODUCTION 1 EXTENDED NOTES FOR TOWARD DEMOCRACY Note to Readers The following notes, prepared with the help of Abigail Modaff of Harvard University, contain fuller documentation for James T. Kloppenberg, Toward Democracy: The Struggle for Self-Rule in European and American Thought, published by Oxford University Press in June, 2016. Page references within these notes refer to the print version of the book. As is indicated on p. 711 of that edition, many of the notes in this document contain a greater range of references and commentary than are available in the book. Readers will, however, find that a few of the notes that are followed by an asterisk in the print version do not differ from the notes in this document; those asterisks will be removed, and typographical errors corrected, in later printings of Toward Democracy. Introduction 1. See the UNESCO report edited by Richard McKeon, Democracy in a World of Tensions (Chicago, 1951), 522. Influential assessments of the universality of democracy at the turn of the twenty-first century include Amartya Sen, “Democracy as a Universal Value,” Journal of Democracy 10 (1999): 3–17; and the widely circulated report by Freedom House, Democracy’s Century: A Survey of Political Change in the Twentieth Century (New York, 1999), which reported that the number of democratic nations had mushroomed from a mere handful in 1900 to over 60 percent by the end of the century. Although those nations contained less than 40 percent of the world’s population, the report confidently predicted that the further expansion of democracy, now praised if not NOTES TO INTRODUCTION 2 yet practiced everywhere, was only a matter of time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Space of Politics: Voegelin, Arendt, and Wolin Compared
    The Space of Politics: Wolin, Voegelin, and Arendt Compared. Thomas Heilke Department of Political Science University of Kansas Prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, August 29-Sept. 2, 2007. © 2007 by Thomas Heilke. Do not cite without express permission of author. For electronic copies or other inquiries, please email: [email protected]. 1. Introduction In January, 2000, a 10 year-old boy stood on the stage of the amphitheater in Fiesole, a small Etruscan-era hill-top town in the Italian province of Tuscany, and recited “In Flanders’ Fields,” the well-known paean to the dead at the second Battle of Ypres in 1915. A physician and second in command of the 1st Brigade Canadian Field Artillery, Dr. John McCrae, wrote the poem during the second week of the battle, upon the death of his friend, Lieutenant Alexis Holmer.1 McCrae was killed in action on 28 January, 1918. The poem reads as follows: In Flanders fields the poppies blow Between the crosses, row on row, That mark our place; and in the sky The larks, still bravely singing, fly Scarce heard amid the guns below. We are the Dead. Short days ago We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow, Loved and were loved, and now we lie In Flanders fields. Take up our quarrel with the foe: To you from failing hands we throw The torch; be yours to hold it high. If ye break faith with us who die We shall not sleep, though poppies grow In Flanders fields.2 The poem is not, perhaps, intended to be “political” in the precise sense of motivating its audience to common action toward a common cause: the background of the poem is the death of a soldier, and it is written by another soldier who was a close friend.
    [Show full text]
  • Politics and Vision
    1 Politics and Vision WILLIAM E. CONNOLLY Political Theory and the Political To study political theory in 1960 was to participate in an enterprise widely thought to be moribund. The air was thick with funeral orations. Because a new science of politics was on the verge of consolidation,political theory in the “normative” or “traditional” sense had become unnecessary. The old theory was speculative and impressionistic,while the new science would be rigorous and testable; the old mixed the descriptive and the nor- mative,while the new would separate them rigorously; the old was too historical in focus,while the new science of lawful regularities tied to pre- dictable events would be drawn from observable evidence in the present. Some interesting questions in the venerable texts might be convertible into testable hypotheses,but in the main and for the most part political theory was in the way and on the way out. Sure,the shape of the future science was still marked by uncertainty. Several “models” competed for hege- mony. There was public choice theory,decision-making theory,systems theory,power theory,communications theory,structural-functionalism, and so on. But,as David Easton put it in a formulation marked by his typical politeness,these perspectives were united in their opposition to traditional theory and bound together by precepts conveyed best by the word behavioralism: The behavioral approach testifies to the coming of age of theory in the social sciences as a whole,wedded,however,to a commitment to the assumptions and methods of empirical science. Unlike the great traditional theories of past political thought,new theory tends to be analytic,not substantive,explanatory rather than ethical,more general and less particular.
    [Show full text]
  • Sheldon Wolin, Hannah Arendt, and Jacques Rancière on Democracy
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Political Science Theses Department of Political Science Spring 4-5-2012 Achieving Genuine Moments from Ordinary Origins: Sheldon Wolin, Hannah Arendt, and Jacques Rancière on Democracy Grant Yarbrough Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/political_science_theses Recommended Citation Yarbrough, Grant, "Achieving Genuine Moments from Ordinary Origins: Sheldon Wolin, Hannah Arendt, and Jacques Rancière on Democracy." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2012. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/political_science_theses/42 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Political Science at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ACHIEVING GENUINE MOMENTS FROM ORDINARY ORIGINS: SHELDON WOLIN, HANNAH ARENDT AND JACQUES RANCIÈRE ON DEMOCRACY by GRANT HENDRICKS YARBROUGH Under the Direction of Dr. Mario Feit ABSTRACT This paper grapples with the differences between genuine and ordinary democracy within the political thought of Jacques Rancière, Sheldon Wolin, and Hannah Arendt. Each discusses the problems of ordinary democracy and offer solutions in terms of what I call genuine democracy. Ordinary democracy is the established norm of liberal democracy celebrated as the stable and a desired “end” of political action. It is what happens when politics as usual becomes the norm and shuts the people from the halls of power. Genuine politics exist within the structure ordinary democracy and seeks to achieve the continuous re-establishment of democratic processes while in the process speeding up and disrupting “politics as usual”.
    [Show full text]