Post-Autistic Economics Network Global Economic News Paecon Home Page PAE Review

www.paecon.net THE PERESTROIKA MOVEMENT An Open Letter to the APSA Leadership and Members As many of you are aware, the American Political Science Association has recently experienced an extraordinary outpouring of frustration with the current state of the American Political Science Review, the APSA, and the profession generally. An anonymous scholar writing as “Mr. Perestroika” circulated to an extensive roster of political scientists a passionate memo asking many provocative, indeed painful, questions. Why do so many leaders of our profession not even read, much less submit, to the APSR? Why is purchase of the APSR made mandatory for membership, thus subsidizing a journal many find unsatisfactory, instead of permitting membership without the journal or with other journals? Why do the APSA Council and APSR Editorial Board seem to be chosen essentially by their predecessors? Why does the APSR and why do other prominent professional fora seem so intensively focused on technical methods, at the expense of the great, substantive political questions that actually intrigue many APSA members, as well as broader intellectual audiences? Though some recipients may have felt uncomfortable with the anonymous authorship and the highly polemical tone of this post, nonetheless an astonishing number of scholars, from all ranks of the profession, felt impelled to announce that they, too, shared these profound dissatisfactions with the status quo. Many noted that in 1998 an APSA membership survey reportedly found that, in fact, a very large proportion of APSA members, to say nothing of scholars who have given up on APSA, were critical of the current condition of the APSR. A lively discussion ensued, in which scholars discussed whether the problems arose from the biases of APSR editors and APSA leaders, from more structural problems in the reviewing processes, or from problems in American intellectual and political life more broadly. Inevitably, people differed in their views. There has been, however, extensive agreement that whatever the sources of the problems, changes need to be made. What changes? Many ideas have been explored in recent email discussions. These have included: Permitting APSA members not to purchase the APSR, but rather to choose alternative journals or none at all. Making the selection of the APSR Editorial Board, the APSA Council, and basic policy decisions concerning the journal and the association more open to genuine democratic decision making by the APSA membership. Revising the APSR reviewing process to seek both to ensure that some methodologies are not automatically vetoed and that most articles are of interest to a broad scholarly audience. Finding ways to encourage scholars who have given up on the APSR to submit their work to it once again. Pursuing the suggestions both for an electronic APSR and a separate “book reviews” journal that the Association’s Strategic Planning Committee has raised. Making the 1998 survey of attitudes toward the APSR widely available, and, yet more importantly, developing mechanisms to examine regularly how satisfied political scientists are with the publications and professional activities they underwrite via their APSA dues. It is very unfortunate that deeply committed political scientists genuinely believe, whether rightly or wrongly, that they cannot criticize the status quo safely without the cloak of anonymity. We should have regular channels through which dissent can be effectively communicated. We, the undersigned, do not represent any consensus on just why the APSR and the APSA are in the condition they are now in, nor any consensus on just what should be done. We are also not an organized or systematically recruited group. We are simply scholars who, after discussing the Perestroika memo over the course of a few days, decided to join in this letter. We do so because we believe strongly that the profession is in danger of alienating a larger and larger number of those who should be its active members, and contributing less and less to the kinds of understanding of politics that it is our responsibility to advance. Hence, we urge the APSA leadership and membership alike to look seriously at the issues raised above, to speak out on them, and to take soon the actions that emerge as most widely endorsed in the ensuing discussions. Christopher S. Allen, University of Georgia Belinda A. Aquino, University of Hawai’i, Manoa Myron Aronoff, Rutgers University Robert Art, Brandeis University Zoltan D. Barany, University of Texas, Austin Bethany Barratt, University of California-Davis David M. Barrett, Villanova University Deborah Baumgold, University of Oregon Seyla Benhabib, Harvard University Thomas U. Berger, Johns Hopkins University Gerald Berk, University of Oregon Larry Berman, University of California Washington Center Sheri E. Berman, Princeton University Michael Bernhard, Penn State University Richard K. Betts, Columbia University Jack Bielasiak, Indiana University Marc Blecher, Oberlin College Mark Blyth, Johns Hopkins University John Bokina, University of Texas, Pan American Joe Bowersox III, Williamette University Paul R. Brass, University of Washington Stephen Eric Bronner, Rutgers University Christopher Brooke, Magdalen College, Oxford University Wendy Brown, University of California, Berkeley Fran Buntman, University of Akron Susan Burgess, Ohio University Bert C. Buzan, California State University, Fullerton Keith J. Bybee, Harvard University Joseph Carens, University of Toronto Barbara J. Callaway, Rutgers University Lief H. Carter, Colorado College Haesook Chae, Baldwin Wallace College Geeta Chowdhry, Northern Arizona University Cornell Clayton, Washington State University Eliot A. Cohen, Johns Hopkins SAIS Stephen Crowley, Oberlin College Bruce Cumings, University of Chicago Jodi Dean, Hobart and William Smith Colleges Thomas DeLuca, Fordham University Michael C. Desch, University of Kentucky Gus diZerega, Whitman College Raymond Duvall, University of Minnesota Tim Duvall, St. John’s University David V. Edwards, University of Texas, Austin John Ehrenberg, Long Island University Fred Eidlin, University of Guelph Richard J. Ellis, Willamette University Edward C. Epstein, University of Utah Peter Euben, University of California, Santa Cruz Daryl R. Fair, College of New Jersey Richard A. Falk, Princeton University Tom Farer, University of Denver Kathy E. Ferguson, University of Hawai’i Leela Fernandes, Rutgers University Joel Fetzer, Central Michigan University Stephen L. Fisher, Emory & Henry College James C. Foster, Oregon State University Samantha Frost, University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana