• Monthly
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $other
  • use PayPal

ONE WEEK TO DOUBLE YOUR DONATION!

A generous CounterPuncher has offered a $25,000 matching grant. So for this week only, whatever you can donate will be doubled up to $25,000! If you have the means, please donate! If you already have done so, thank you for your support. All contributions are tax-deductible.
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Poli-Sci  and the Propagation  of “Promontory Views”  of Reality

Photo by 準建築人手札網站 Forgemin | CC BY 2.0

In one of her many thought-provoking essays, Mary Louise Pratt explains how, over the course of the 19th century, accounts written by British travelers in Africa evolved from discourses characterized by intimate engagements with the land and its people, to ones dominated by what she calls “promontory views”. She goes on to suggest a that the onset of this visual distancing in travel literature effectively parallels the implantation of British Imperial institutions on that continent.

The implication is clear: in order to teach their fellow countrymen to rule the natives with the requisite degree of sang froid, the British needed to edit out the intimate and oh-so-human details of African lives and cultural structures from their renderings of the colonial reality.

Political Science emerged as an institutionalized discipline during the same late 19th century era, and become consolidated in the academy as the US began its rise as an imperial power at the start of the 20th century.

A mere coincidence?  I don’t think so.

One of the core conceits of   political science   is that vastly complex and highly diverse human behaviors are amenable to theoretical modeling. There is, of course, nothing wrong with seeking to diagram complex   comportments across cultural boundaries.

The problem arises when the institutional incentives for developing such theories begins to greatly outstrip the extant mechanisms for empirically verifying their claims.

Take for example, the issue of sub-state identity movements in today’s Europe. The Lega Nord, Viktor Orban’s Fidesz and the drive for independence in Catalonia are all taking flight at more or less the same time.  For the political scientist, the key to making sense of these things lies in discovering the “universal”, albeit at times locally-inflected, structures and forces that drive these phenomena.

In this frame of analysis, the particular cultural, linguistic, and historical realities of the societies where these movements are taking place are thrust into a decidedly secondary space.

Put another way, Political Science specializes in the creation of “promontory views” of reality, and rewards it practitioners for their audacity in generating the neatest and most narratively enveloping explanations.

That these “explanations” can work to seriously denature and distort the particularities of certain of the phenomena under analysis—e.g. lead to the portrayal of Catalan nationalism as a blood and soil movement or one led by economic elites—often seems to be beside the point.

If you think I am exaggerating, go back and look at the record of the discipline when it came—to name just two examples—to explaining the empirical realities  of the late-stage  Soviet Union or the dynamics of Iraqi society  under Saddam.

So why then are these often linguistically and culturally handicapped people almost always favored by the media over historians and true cultural experts when it comes time to explain the outside world and its ways to the masses?

Because the people at the highest levels of power like it that way.

They realize that providing simplistic, context-free explanations to complex and variegated historical phenomena makes their ability to stay in power and control the general course of social evolution that much easier.  These bite-size and overwhelming “presentist” explanations also greatly facilitate their ability to wage war—be it of the economic, diplomatic or military variety—when they deem it necessary.

Political science was, in large measure, promoted by the powerful to generate storehouse of simplifying and face-erasing promontory views. And, at least in the countries in the closest orbits of  US power,  these same patrons make sure that the discipline’s practitioners are embraced and promoted in a way that those from other humanist disciplines seldom are.  Think about this the next time you are listening to “expert” analysis on this or that global hotspot  from a Political Scientist.

More articles by:

Thomas S. Harrington is a professor of Iberian Studies at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut and the author of the recently released  Livin’ la Vida Barroca: American Culture in a Time of Imperial Orthodoxies.

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
Weekend Edition
October 18, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Anthony DiMaggio
Trump as the “Anti-War” President: on Misinformation in American Political Discourse
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Where’s the Beef With Billionaires?
Rob Urie
Capitalism and the Violence of Environmental Decline
Paul Street
Bernie in the Deep Shit: Dismal Dem Debate Reflections
Andrew Levine
What’s So Awful About Foreign Interference?
T.J. Coles
Boris Johnson’s Brexit “Betrayal”: Elect a Clown, Expect a Pie in Your Face
Joseph Natoli
Trump on the March
Ashley Smith
Stop the Normalization of Concentration Camps
Pete Dolack
The Fight to Overturn the Latest Corporate Coup at Pacifica Has Only Begun
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Russophobia at Democratic Party Debate
Chris Gilbert
Forward! A Week of Protest in Catalonia
Daniel Beaumont
Pressing Done Here: Syria, Iraq and “Informed Discussion”
Daniel Warner
Greta the Disturber
M. G. Piety
“Grim Positivism” vs. Truthiness in Biography
John Kendall Hawkins
Journey to the Unknown Interior of (You)
Christopher Fons – Conor McMullen
The Centrism of Elizabeth Warren
Nino Pagliccia
Peace Restored in Ecuador, But is trust?
Rebecca Gordon
Extorting Ukraine is Bad Enough But Trump Has Done Much Worse
Kathleen Wallace
Trump Can’t Survive Where the Bats and Moonlight Laugh
Clark T. Scott
Cross-eyed, Fanged and Horned
Eileen Appelbaum
The PR Campaign to Hide the Real Cause of those Sky-High Surprise Medical Bills
Olivia Alperstein
Nuclear Weapons are an Existential Threat
Colin Todhunter
Asia-Pacific Trade Deal: Trading Away Indian Agriculture?
Sarah Anderson
Where is “Line Worker Barbie”?
Brian Cloughley
Yearning to Breathe Free
Jill Richardson
Why are LGBTQ Rights Even a Debate?
Jesse Jackson
What I Learn While Having Lunch at Cook County Jail
Kathy Kelly
Death, Misery and Bloodshed in Yemen
Maximilian Werner
Leadership Lacking for Wolf Protection
Arshad Khan
The Turkish Gambit
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Rare Wildflower vs. Mining Company
Dianne Woodward
Race Against Time (and For Palestinians)
Norman Ball
Wall Street Sees the Light of Domestic Reindustrialization
Ramzy Baroud
The Last Lifeline: The Real Reason Behind Abbas’ Call for Elections
Binoy Kampmark
African Swine Fever Does Its Worst
Nicky Reid
Screwing Over the Kurds: An All-American Pastime
Louis Proyect
“Our Boys”: a Brutally Honest Film About the Consequences of the Occupation
Coco Das
#OUTNOW
Cesar Chelala
Donald Trump vs. William Shakespeare
Ron Jacobs
Calling the Kettle White: Ishmael Reed Unbound
Stephen Cooper
Scientist vs. Cooper: The Interview, Round 3 
Susan Block
How “Hustlers” Hustles Us
Charles R. Larson
Review: Elif Shafak’s “10 Minutes 38 Seconds in This Strange World”
David Yearsley
Sunset Songs
October 17, 2019
Steve Early
The Irishman Cometh: Teamster History Hits the Big Screen (Again)
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail