A really subversive suggestion for APSA
The American Political Science Association is divided into organized sections. Most of these sections are based on research interests — the various subfields of international relations, political theory, American politics, etc. According to this page on APSA’s web site: Organized Sections have become a vital part of the Association by sponsoring panels at the Annual ...
The American Political Science Association is divided into organized sections. Most of these sections are based on research interests -- the various subfields of international relations, political theory, American politics, etc. According to this page on APSA's web site:
The American Political Science Association is divided into organized sections. Most of these sections are based on research interests — the various subfields of international relations, political theory, American politics, etc. According to this page on APSA’s web site:
Organized Sections have become a vital part of the Association by sponsoring panels at the Annual Meeting, producing informative newsletters, and recognizing scholarly achievements of their members.
Now, one of the sections is called “New Political Science.” According to the section’s website:
The New Political Science Section of the American Political Science Association is organized by the Caucus for a New Political Science, an organization of political scientists united by the idea that Political Science as an academic discipline should be committed to advancing progressive political development.
I went to one of this section’s APSA panels. Beyond the standard lefty refrains, most of the discourse was about how they felt marginalized within the power structure of the political science discipline. This is a pretty amusing assertion. At least the progressives have their own organized section. Since one of APSA’s chief function is to organize the annual conference, and since lefties can at least arrange their own panels, they can carve out a niche for themselves at the meeting. However, there is no organized section for conservative or libertarian scholars within APSA.* I certainly don’t begrudge the progressives for having their own section. And I honestly don’t know if there would be enough of a critical mass within the discipline to create the political science equivalent of a Federalist Society. Such a section would certainly require people like John Lemon to come out of the closet, for example. However, it seems to me that some professor — I’m sorry, let me rephrase that — some tenured professor might want to consider setting the wheels in motion for organizing such a section. [And what would you call it? Old Political Science?–ed. I’m perfectly happy to receive name suggestions below!!] If nothing else, such a move would help to nurture the persecution complex that pervades the New Political Scientists. *To be fair, right-of-center “related organizations” such as the Eric Voegelin Society or the Claremont Institute do sponsor panels that take place at the APSA meetings. However, these do not have the same status as regular APSA sections, which include New Political Science.
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy

Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.

Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.

It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.

Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.