Why do people study IR and Comparative jointly (say as major and minor fields)? What theoretical and/or empirical commonalities do these fields share? I can understand IR and political theory. I can understand comparative and American. IR or Comparative combined with policy sounds swell. But IR and comparative? Signed, Puzzled in Peoria
IR & Comparative
(21 posts) (13 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Is this a serious question?
I suppose a dyed-in-the-wool structural realist might not get the connection between the two, but if you think that domestic politics influences foreign policy decisions by states and that these decisions matter in international relations (which, at this point, is most of the subfield in IR), then understanding comparative domestic politics is helpful.
On the flip side, if you think that interdependent economies might influence domestic policymaking (or domestic elections), the understanding IR, particularly IPE, is helpful to studying comparative domestic politics. Indeed, at this point, IPE and CPE have largely become one merged field as the distinction between what is a purely domestic economic policy and what is an international economic policy has largely evaporated.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It is a serious question motivated by several conversations with a couple of graduate students who can't answer it beyond talking about nations and a lack of interest in American politics. Your CPE/IPE and foreign policy statements are on point. But the CP study of comparative political behavior and institutions shares theoretical and empirical foundations with American. The point being that the answer to this question, which graduate students must think about seriously, is not always self-evident and depends much on what areas of the fields one wishes to study.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Given that the most interesting work in CP-behavior is on how different institutional arrangements affect behavior, there's little Americanists have to say that is relevant. Same goes for straight up institutions work. If for example you're studying electoral institutions and variation in outcomes, American has little to offer.
Which is not to say that IR has much value to add either, of course.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The magical lines between countries tend not to separate the stuff on either side of the lines. Ethnic conflict, civil war, PE stuff all tend to have IR and CP converge, as there are dynamics and theories that cross lines. IR/CP is a very natural combination but none of the other combos is inherently wrong, either. It depends on your interests, your questions and your theories. I have used comparative theories of ethnic conflict to understand the IR of ethnic conflict, and I have applied IR theories (security dilemma, deterrence) to understand civil war. I am now using civil-military relations stuff (comparative, right?) to understand how NATO is operating in Afghanistan.
Of course, grad students may end up choosing IR as a second field, rather than theory or American, because it might be an easier field to study for comps. So, your grad students may be justifying a decision that they took for reasons they do not want to admit.
Posted 2 years ago # -
As McIRProf notes, a significant number of the "hot topics" in IPE/CPE, as well as Security Studies and comparative conflict/contention, are basically indistinguishable. Indeed, even before some of these convergences CP/IR combos were the norm, in no small measure because IR people usually focused on a particular region and CP people dealt with interstate issues in their regions.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I started off IR/AP because my emphasis was on American foreign policy. However, over time, a lot of my research ended up focusing on the politics of the third world (the target of American foreign policy) and this has led me to CP work.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Not to be mean, but a question like that really does boggle the mind. Failing to answer means failing to understand how international relations influence domestic politics, and vice versa. The graduate students you asked must have been brain-dead.
Posted 2 years ago # -
There are also job market considerations. Lots of places (especially outside the big R1s) look for someone who can teach a combination of CP and IR courses. None of that is a good reason to pick a dissertation topic, of course, but it might factor into one's strategy in grad school of coursework, comps, etc.
Posted 2 years ago # -
(I gave myself this handle BEFORE I saw this thread--honest).
I think the practical reason I studied them was that a few people I knew were on the market with this combination of fields. And I do human rights and intrastate conflict, and couldn't see any advantage in pigeonholing myself as a strict IR or comparative person. In my current job I am considered to be an "IR" person, although my work is at least as comparative. Also, aside from perhaps the Middle East, *most* (not all) area studies people tend to be pegged as comparative. If you do large N cross-national work but aren't a regional specialist, it's hard to be accepted as a comparativist. Of course, blue blood (interstate conflict, diplomacy) IR people also can't imagine you to be one of their IR brethren. So you kind of have to call yourself IR/comparative or vice-versa.For me (disagree if you like), IR and comparative have separate origins and intellectual histories, but so much of what people study involves so much of both of them that the line in the middle is irreversibly blurred.
Posted 2 years ago # -
A lot of comparativists I know wish they had had more time to study American. Obviously, the Americanists' concerns are different and they ignore questions we think are cool, but if you are studying electoral politics the methodological and theoretical links are obvious. That said, almost no one does it, which I blame on the narrow-mindedness of the Americanists, who would never hire as an Americanist someone whose research was equally concerned with Europe or Japan. Such a person would have to go out as a comparativist or methodologist. And you'd have trouble as a comparativist because you would be less able to apply for area studies slots, although it's now less crucial to have an area than it used to be.
Posted 2 years ago # -
On the flip side I'm an americanist but my research has a ton of comparative behavior implications. Ideally I would have done american and comparative as a major and minor but for job market reasons I chose not to. Americanists seem to think any cross national study is a threat or treachery to the subfield. Comparativists view american as virtually worthless. Which I think is kind of funny because when I took my american behavior seminar I found a ton of work that was easily transferable to other countries.
I was interested in behavior and my substantive knowledge/ interest in american politics dwarfs my knowledge of any other country. I'd never be allowed to teach a comparative behavior class as an americanist so it gives me absolutely no help on the job market. I imagine that a comparativist interested in the US would feel the same way. If I had no job market/tenure worries at all I'd be a cross national behavior person.
Posted 2 years ago # -
This thread totally solves my questions I had as an undergraduate student. There were no professors in my school teaching comparative and american politics at the same time. It was pretty odd because as comparative politics are really based on american institutions (and democratization) it was weird that comparative politics didn't consider american politics seriously. I thought about studying AP and CPE but I guess that's out of question.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Wait - there's no logical overlap between American and IR?
Read the 50th anniv. issue of IO, esp the Martin-Simmons article. Sorry, can't be arsed to summarize it.
To deny that there's been intellectual arbitrage between the two subfields strains credulity. However, that's not to say that it's an optimal grad school strategy, as others have already mentioned.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"as comparative politics are really based on american institutions (and democratization)"
Oh, is that right?
Posted 2 years ago # -
really?/
I was just referring to the fact that most of the arguments are based on comparing the american/uk trajectory of development to many others (developing countries, etc).
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'd never be allowed to teach a comparative behavior class as an americanist so it gives me absolutely no help on the job market.
That's silly. It may or may not help on the market, but there are plenty of jobs where beyond a few service courses you can teach whatever you want. There are also a number of jobs (smaller schools) that are always looking to hire faculty who give them more coverage and flexibility across subfields.
comparative politics are really based on american institutions (and democratization)
Since the Americanists in my department are sane, I occasionally forget that the subfield is full of crazy people who can't seem to remember that they're really just in an oversized sub-subfield of comparative.
Posted 2 years ago # -
ilikeicecream, I can absolutely assure you that you're wrong. Sure, there are people who think in the way you describe. But my experience as a cross-over AP/CP person is that a) it can be done, b) it is done, c) if done well it is well received by scholars in both subfields, and d) you can be successful doing it.
Whether it's a good strategy to adopt is a different question. But don't think that there's no way to be an AP person who also contributes to the CP lit., or a CP person who also contributes to the AP lit.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Sounds like flyoverprof is doing a great job of preparing his grads for the job market. Awesome advising, great job!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Funny thing is that beyond the Top 40 schools, we rarely hire in comparative based on the standards of the field, but rather on area specialty. The way comparative is taught in PhD programs tends to be drastically different than how it is taught at most schools. This is why it might seem like American/Comparative seem like natural matches in terms of scholarship, in the real world most job adds ask for area knowledge or the ability to teach basic IR courses.
Posted 2 years ago #