Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
10 Things Political Scientists Know That We Don’t
10 Things Political Scientists Know That We Don’t
Apr 27, 2026 7:57 AM

“If economics is the dismal science,” says Hans Noel, an associate professor at Georgetown University, “then political science is the dismissed science.”

Most Americans—from pundits to voters—don’t think that political science has much to say about political life. But there are some things, notes Noel, that “political scientists know that it seems many practitioners, pundits, journalists, and otherwise informed citizens do not.”

Here are excerpts from Noel’s list of ten things political scientists know that you don’t:

#1. It’s The Fundamentals, Stupid

The most exciting and visible part of politics is the political campaign.

Politicians and their team of strategists, pollsters, and surrogates wage battle for the votes of the public. Slogans are trumpeted. Gaffes are made. Tactics are deployed.

And it probably does not matter all that much.

At least not as much as the political environment matters. Presidential elections can be forecast with incredible accuracy well before the campaign really begins. In fact, if all you know is the state of the economy, you know pretty well

how the incumbent party will do.

#2. The Will of the People is Incredibly Hard to Put Your Finger on

How do you know a mentator is making stuff up? They pretend toknow what “The American people” want, think, will do, or anything else.

The first, most obvious, problem is that a majority in a given survey doesnot represent all of “the American people.” If 75 percent of respondents say they are for something, this means that 25 percent did not say they were for it. Those 25 percent are Americans, too. But of course, we have a strong belief in majority rule, so perhaps that is not so troublesome.

#3. The Will of The People May Not Even Exist

OK, let us say that “the American people” do have preferences, even if it is hard to measure them with surveys. We need to aggregate those preferences somehow. We need to let the American people participate in democracy and get collective decisions that are reasonable. That might not be possible.

#4. There Is No Such Thing As A Mandate

Take items #1, #2, and #3 together, and it is hard to interpret elections the way that politicians and pundits want us to. Economic fundamentals guide voters who might not have well-defined attitudes to vote in a system that cannot satisfy all the demands of democratic decision-making. This is not a formula for sending a clear message to anyone.

#5. Duverger: It’s The Law

Social scientists are notoriously unwilling to declare anything with certainty. Physical science is full of laws; we just have findings. Except for Duverger’s Law. It was put into print in the 1950s by Maurice Duverger but understood for much longer (Riker, 1982). To wit: “The simple-majority single-ballot system favours the two-party system.”

#6. Party On

Policy disagreements happen because people disagree about policy. Liberals believe the government has an important role to play in managing the economy, and conservatives do not. Conservatives believe that the government must protect a set of cultural values that liberals do not share.

It is true that politicians also want to win, and scoring political points is a part of that. But this winning is in service to policy goals that are divergent. promises are just incoherent.

#7. Most Independents Are Closet Partisans

It is true that if you ask a survey respondent if they identify with a major party or are “independent,” a growing number over the last several decades will say they are independent. The problem is that a majority of those independents act like partisans when es time to vote or take positions on issues.

#8. Special Interests Are A Political Fiction

How do you know a politician is being dishonest? He blames something on “special interests.”

What is a special interest? Why, it is an interest opposed to the “general interest” or collective will. But see items #2 and #3 above: There ain’t no such thing.

Special interests are labor and business. They are environmentalists and developers. They are pro-life and pro-choice activists. They are gays and they are fundamentalist Christians. They are you. They are me. It is hard to think of any political e that does not satisfy some interests and oppose others

#9. The Grass Does Not Grow By Itself

Is the Tea Party a “real” movement, or is it “astroturf”?

The speed at which this debate is bouncing around partisan circles is shocking, considering how silly the question is. If a movement is astroturf if some outside force is organizing it, then all movements are astroturf. People do not spontaneously wake up and go to rallies. Someone hosts the rally and invites them e.

#10 We Do Not Know What You Think You Know

Among the things that we think we know, but that political scientists havefound at best mixed evidence for:

1. Money buys the votes of the general public. (Maybe savvy donors just donate to candidates who will win in the hopes of influencing them.)

2. Money buys the votes of elected legislators. (Maybe savvy donors just donate to candidates who will vote the way they would like, and not to those who would not.)

3. Parties influence the votes of elected legislators. (Maybe politicians just sort themselves into the parties they agree with in the first place.)

(Via: Arnold Kling)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
A Stark contrast
Kishore has helpfully pointed out the discussions going on elsewhere about Rodney Stark’s piece and the related NYT David Brook’s op-ed. He derides some of menters for their lack of economic understanding, but I’d like to applaud menter’s post. He questions, as I do, the fundamental validity of Stark’s thesis (which essentially ignores such an important strand of Christianity as Eastern Orthodoxy). Among other astute observations, Christopher Sarsfield asks: “Was it the principles of Christianity that put the ‘goddess of...
Amy Welborn’s blog on capitalism and Catholicism
The Acton debate on the relationship has featured blog posts on Rodney Stark and David Brooks’s column on Starks. Amy Welborn’s site has more in these two posts (here and here), with a somewhat lively debate in ments sections. Several of ments regard Max Weber’s thesis on the Protestant work ethic and capitalism, and reveal a misunderstanding of what makes for economic growth in Ireland and the lack of it in Latin America. It’s pretty obvious there are few Actonites...
Public v. private services
Fast Company Now is reporting that “for the first time, customer satisfaction with federal agency Websites has surpassed offline government services,” according to an American Customer Satisfaction Index report. What is especially noteworthy, however, is that online private sector services consistently rank higher in satisfaction than their governmental counterparts. “Where the gap between offline public and private services has narrowed, the report said, e-government is trailing far behind the private sector online. That, said ACSI chief Claes Fornell, shows room...
Perusing Peru
Fr. Philip De Vous, chaplain of Thomas More College in Crestview Hills, KY and an adjunct scholar of public policy at the Acton Institute, writes of a recent trip to see operations of the Doe Run Company in Lima, Peru. It seems that the Doe Run Company has been accosted by “criticism from certain journalists and certain sectors of the Catholic Church and other Christian denominations” regarding its practice of business ethics. What Fr. De Vous experienced in Peru, however,...
There’s no such thing as “free” health care
Remember: when you recieve a “free” service from the government, it’s not actually free. You’re paying for that service through your taxes. And when the government sets up a monopoly in an area like health care, it’s probably going to end up being more expensive and cheaper at the same time – more expensive because people are less likely to use a “free” service prudently, and cheaper because the overuse of the service will force officials to impose major restraints...
One more reason…
Here’s the best ad hominem (no pun intended) reason to deplore the creation of chimeras: Stalin, the self-proclaimed “Brilliant Genuis of Humanity,” wanted them. The Scotsman reports that “Soviet dictator Josef Stalin ordered the creation of Planet of the Apes-style warriors by crossing humans with apes, according to recently uncovered secret documents.” According to the documents, the order came from Stalin’s wish to create a race of super-soldiers: “I want a new invincible human being, insensitive to pain, resistant and...
“Brain Drain” reconsidered
A while back I mentioned a new ing out questioning conventional wisdom on the “brain drain” problem caused by emigration from developing nations. The book will not be out for a while yet, but the author, Michele Pistone, has a long post on Mirror of Justice describing her findings and how they relate to traditional moral concerns raised by Catholic social teaching. ...
Ethics & Economics reviews
The Acton Institute has placed three titles from the Lexington Books Studies in Ethics & Economics series, edited by Acton director of research Samuel Gregg. The first is Within the Market Strife: American Catholic Economic Thought from Rerum Novarum to Vatican II, by Acton research fellow Kevin Schmiesing. The reviews are here. Daddypundit says, “Schmiesing has made his book accessible to persons of all faiths regardless of their own background. He has meticulously researched his book and it shows in...
The Coventry Carol
The Coventry Carol (Words Attributed to Robert Croo, 1534; English Melody, 1591). Click here for MIDI version (and sing along!) Lully, lulla, thou little tiny child, By by, lully lullay. Lully, lulla, thou little tiny child, By by, lully lullay. O sisters, too, how may we do, For to preserve this day; This poor Youngling for whom we sing, By, by, lully, lullay. Herod the King, in his raging, Charged he hath this day; His men of might, in his...
Petrol-socialism
Predictions, anyone? Chavez continues to flex his socialist muscles as he has now given ExxonMobil an ultimatum: either give him the controlling interest in pany, or lose their Venezuelan operation altogether. This story is notable because ExxonMobil is the pany who has thus far refused Chavez’s “offer they can’t refuse.” Now, I don’t think anyone had any misconceptions that Chavez would be a ‘nice socialist’, but what was that proverb about being doomed to repeat history? What worries me about...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved