Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Self-reflective political scientists have extensively reviewed the history and development of the discipline and argued over its future direction. Most of this discussion has focused on research rather than curriculum and pedagogy. Though there has been some useful assessment of graduate programs, there has been little effort to systematically survey undergraduate scope and methods courses. This lack of data leaves the discipline unable to adequately assess how much we are teaching undergraduates about the scope of political science or, indeed, what we mean by the scope of the discipline. Similarly, though there have been many battles waged over the appropriateness of various methodologies for our discipline, it is not clear how much of this discussion, or how many of these methods, make it into the undergraduate classroom. This paper presents the preliminary findings of a survey of political science departments on the content of undergraduate scope and methods courses.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Self-reflective political scientists have extensively reviewed the history and development of the discipline and argued over its future direction. Most of this discussion has focused on research rather than curriculum and pedagogy. Though there has been some useful assessment of graduate programs (see Schwartz-Shea 2003), there has been little effort to systematically survey undergraduate scope and methods courses (for a notable exception see Thies and Hogan 2005). This lack of data leaves the discipline unable to adequately assess how much we are teaching undergraduates about the scope of political science or, indeed, what we mean by the scope of the discipline. Similarly, though there have been many battles waged over the appropriateness of various methodologies for our discipline, it is not clear how much of this discussion, or how many of these methods, make it into the undergraduate classroom. This research plans to report the survey findings of a nation-wide sampling of political science departments. The survey will be conducted in Fall 2005. In examining undergraduate curriculum, the survey explores, for example, whether a scope and methods course is a requirement or an elective in the major, what topics are covered, and what books are used.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: When the topic of global governance or post-national governance arises, it generally does so in the context of the cooperation between nation states, international agreements and the role of international organizations. As opposed to this, global governance through the self-organization of transnational civil society is rarely discussed. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to demonstrate the scope and limitations of global governance through civil-society self-organization. The case of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which is now deemed a success, has been selected to demonstrate this phenomenon at work. What is involved here is a globally distributed environmental label for the certification of sustainably managed forests. The FSC shows how a private civil-society regime can be implemented, how its implementation can be controlled and how violations can be sanctioned. It may be stated that the case of the Forest Stewardship Council is a form of global governance without nation-state involvement that can be viewed as a complete alternative to global governance through nation states. The rapid spread of the FSC system was enhanced by the dynamic combination of civil-society self-organization with market mechanisms. Moreover, the FSC system fills a gap that arose from the political failure at the level of international regimes. However, it has become clear that national forest protection standards are needed for the FSC system to function smoothly. The FSC system cannot replace national legislation and its implementation by an effective administration. The fact that the FSC can rely not only on its own internal means of sanction (i.e. withdrawal of certification), but can also resort to boycotts as a potential external instrument of sanction is undoubtedly a key factor behind the success of the FSC. However, the analysis also shows the limits of global governance through self-organization: As no nation state has the norm-setting monopoly, the FSC system competes with other certification systems in many countries throughout the world. Overall, the FSC system can be deemed a success. At the same time, however, its success demonstrates the limits of global governance without the involvement of nation states. Private standards appear to work best if a specific combination of self-organization and market mechanisms comes to fruition, if the non-state systems are embedded in nation-state systems, if resources are available outside the system that can, if necessary, be used to mobilize consumers and if the problems that necessarily arise from the competition of certification systems can be overcome.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) and the state administrative court of North Rhine-Westphalia repeatedly sparred over neo-Nazi demonstrations. Bans of neo-Nazi rallies were routinely overruled by the FCC. Even after a decision of the FCC’s full First Senate in 2004, the administrative court continued to prohibit rallies, squarely defying FCC precedent. The underlying question is how much freedom of speech can neo-Nazis in Germany claim? The criminal code prohibits certain types of speech. According to the state administrative court, the articulation of certain antidemocratic ideas outside the scope of criminally prohibited speech nevertheless expresses ideas contradicting human dignity. This warrants prohibiting demonstrations that would provide a forum for disseminating such ideas. The FCC, however, finds that the rejection of these ideas by the majority does not justify bans on neo-Nazi rallies. As long as they fall short of criminally prohibited speech, even objectionable ideas may be publicly articulated. The FCC has been characterized as the guardian of German democracy. The paper examines how the FCC has positioned itself as the relatively more liberal, “speech-permissive” body. Delineating the scope of constitutionally permissible public discourse, it has taken the stance that the open articulation of ideas fosters democracy as long as the ideas do not fall within criminally prohibited categories. Thus it is widening the field of public discourse in awarding a higher degree of faith in democracy. The similar controversy in the United States surrounding the Nazi march at Skokie, Illinois, will be used as a comparative case.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The Scopes Evolution Trial of 1925 pitted religious fundamentalism against modern science and drew more attention than any court case of the young century. According to historian George Tindall, the cavalcade of spectators included “publicity-hounds, curiosity-seekers, professional evangelists and professional atheists, a blind mountaineer who proclaimed himself the world’s greatest authority on the Bible, ballyhoo agents for the Florida boom, hot dog and soda pop hucksters, and a miscellany of reporters and publicists.” One such journalist, H. L. Mencken of the Baltimore Sun, described the people in Dayton as “‘yokels,’ ‘morons,’ ‘hillbillies’ and ‘peasants,’” arguing that the display of “‘Baptist and Methodist Barbarism,’” established a cultural and intellectual abyss in the region. Dayton’s new image had a profound impact on the development of American fundamentalist Christianity. Religious historian Karen Armstrong contends that before the Scopes trial, “fundamentalists had been willing to work alongside socialists and liberal Christians.” Whereas after the trial, she continues, “they swung to the far right, where they remained. They felt humiliated by the media attack. It was very nasty. There was a sense of loss of prestige, and, above all, a sense of fear.”

Although the trial itself has been thoroughly documented, scholars have not discussed the psychological implications of this intense media disavowal of Dayton. This paper attempts to examine critically the national and international coverage of the trial and, using psychologist Alfred Adler’s theory of the Inferiority Complex, to analyze the response of local fundamentalist religious groups to this barrage of attention. One particular response to the Inferiority Complex that Adler described is the individual’s rejection of society, a turning inward towards cultural isolation. In a similar vein, historian Edward Larson argues that “as a result of the Scopes trial . . . fundamentalists responded by withdrawing. They did not abandon their faith, however, but set about constructing a separate subculture with independent religious, educational and social institutions.” William Jennings Brian, the leader of the fundamentalist crusade against evolution, died only a few days after the trial, and almost immediately his near-martyrdom set in motion plans to found a college in his honor. Opening its doors in 1930, Bryan College promoted a separatist and defensive stance among its students, and it continues today to lobby for the teaching of Creationism and Intelligent Design in American schools. The founding of William Jennings Bryan College and its presence in the contemporary fundamentalist movement represents a tangible institutional legacy of the Scopes evolution trial that remains unexamined.