Guest Blogger: A Field Guide to Political Scientists

Dear readers,

This year, I have the privilege of sharing a house with Kate, a student studying International Relations. We have spent many nights conversing about the topics she covers in her political science classes. Even funnier are her stories about the people in her classes. After one of our usual rousing discussions, I realized that my knowledge of political science is very minimal. My interaction with political scientists has also been quite limited. I really have no idea what political scientists study or even do. Since Kate is the resident expert on political science and an excellent writer, I asked her to be a guest writer on this blog.

Here is her entry: A Field Guide to Political Scientists.
By Kate B.

I have spent years living among political-scientists-to-be in their natural habitat, the Jane Goodall of future lawyers and politicians. Years spent in debate, AP Government, and college trying to understand their ways have given me some insights. They are manipulative and distrustful beings: decidedly more fiery than economists, anthropologists, or historians. (Note: We I.R. majors are something completely different breed, a cooler, snobby sort of group who always talks about how much better things are in Ljubistania.) Though they tend to concentrate in conservative-dom here in the Red State, these Political Science majors (PSMs) run the ideological gamut--as well as the spectrum of anality. You never know when you might encounter one of these volatile beings in the wild, so, I give you A PoliSci Field Guide: How to Identify (And Handle) A Political Science Major.

The first tipoff is THEY ARGUE:

To many of our PLSCers, arguing is not merely a means to an end, but is instead a cherished pastime. A debater heritage coupled with a persistent opponent often means hammer and tongs for hours on end.

Why is this? Well, I have yet to meet an apathetic polisci major. They are all opinionated about something and therefore utterly convinced that they are the only ones to see clearly on an issue. Disagree at your peril. I have met Communists, Socialists, Constitutionalists, and Anarchists; they all have their thing. And they will either beat it to death verbally or just roll their eyes at your ignorance of campaign spending regulations and how our democratic society will fall to a blackened ruin without them. Sometimes, they do both. Simultaneously.

Next, THEY FEIGN CYNICISM:

Except for when sucking up to the professor, there is not a political science major out there who doesn't mercilessly mock the subject. Future political scientists seem to derive a savage pleasure from tearing apart political science. They freely admit that political science is corrupt, bizarre, messed up, or even fundamentally flawed. These cynic idealists almost joyfully point out just how screwed-up their chosen field is. But deep, deep down, THEY ALL BELIEVE IN SOMETHING:

It may take some searching, but every last one of them has his or her own sweet spot. They all get that starry-eyed half-smile and become a little more adamant, a little more feeling, a little more emotional as they talk about Tocqueville, strict constructionism, or universal health care. Every future political scientist really and truly has a passionate hope for Some Thing or Some Day, even if that enduring hope is obscured by cynicism or debate. And that is why we love them.

Here is Kate's blunder:
Wearing tights to church, and then realizing on the walk home that her tights had more holes than fishnets.

Here is Kate's blessing:
The abundance of sugar cookies that the universe (aka Judy) provided this Valentine's Day.