The intellectual history presented in the textbook is Eurocentric.
This week the textbook covered some of the foundational thinkers and ideas in the discipline of political science. In this weekly journal I want you to reflect and write upon the following ideas and questions.
- The intellectual history presented in the textbook is Eurocentric. ‘Eurocentric’ is a word that can mean different things in different contexts, but here it means that the history of political thinking focuses on the contributions and ideas of Europeans and not on other groups of people.
- Given that all societies have governments and engage in collective action, why does political science draw its most significant thinking from a small group of Europeans from a particular era? Given that foundational ideas in US political culture, such as ‘federalism’ and ‘freedom’ also have roots outside of these European thinkers, why only talk about this same handful of thinkers?
- What do you think are some impacts of having such a narrow reading of the intellectual history of thinking about collective behavior and governments?
- How might you think differently about politics and government if the intellectual history of the ideas included the contributions of people from different societies?
Please be specific and keep in mind the 300 word minimum.