The Politics of Political Science: Re-Inscribing Latin American Experiences

Latin America has traditionally been both a politically lively space with strong left-wing forces and a privileged site for radical thinking. Indeed, during the 1950s and 1960s, Marxism was very influential in the social sciences. In the 1980s and 1990s, this situation changed dramatically and liberalism became dominant. The prevailing narrative within the academic discipline of Political Science (PS) today describes this shift as a process of modernization and improvement since social scientists would have moved from activism to serious science, rightly embracing the notion of academic neutrality. This thesis focuses on the trajectory of PS in Uruguay and Chile, and attempts an alternative interpretation of this process, telling the story of these changes in a different way. The core argument is that changes in PS as an academic discipline in the region are a product of power relations and contextual transformations at different levels. The rise of the United States, the collapse of the Soviet Union and its effects, the traumatizing dictatorships of the 1970s, the experience of the democratic transitions, the hegemony of the neoliberal discourse as well as internal disciplinary dynamics of conflict and institution-building had a huge impact on PS reality (its discourse and people). PS is a human activity that affects and is affected by others: the political nature of the discipline is also constituted by its inevitable involvement in broader power dynamics. Indeed, this thesis unpacks PS role in the (neo) liberal formation of the 1980s and 1990s in Latin America. By exploring the Politics of Political Science (PPS) in this way, we will deepen our knowledge of the politics of our times. The research employs multiple methods, including the systematic analysis of 1194 articles published in the leading PS journals of the countries under study, 58 semi-structured interviews, an auto-ethnographic narrative, as well as other complementary strategies.

Latin America has traditionally been both a politically lively space with strong left-wing forces and a privileged site for radical thinking. Indeed, during the 1950s and 1960s, Marxism was very influential in the social sciences. In the 1980s and 1990s, this situation changed dramatically and liberalism became dominant. The prevailing narrative within the academic discipline of Political Science (PS) today describes this shift as a process of modernization and improvement since social scientists would have moved from activism to serious science, rightly embracing the notion of academic neutrality. This thesis focuses on the trajectory of PS in Uruguay and Chile, and attempts an alternative interpretation of this process, telling the story of these changes in a different way. The core argument is that changes in PS as an academic discipline in the region are a product of power relations and contextual transformations at different levels. The rise of the United States, the collapse of the Soviet Union and its effects, the traumatizing dictatorships of the 1970s, the experience of the democratic transitions, the hegemony of the neoliberal discourse as well as internal disciplinary dynamics of conflict and institution-building had a huge impact on PS reality (its discourse and people). PS is a human activity that affects and is affected by others: the political nature of the discipline is also constituted by its inevitable involvement in broader power dynamics. Indeed, this thesis unpacks PS role in the (neo) liberal formation of the 1980s and 1990s in Latin America. By exploring the Politics of Political Science (PPS) in this way, we will deepen our knowledge of the politics of our times. The research employs multiple methods, including the systematic analysis of 1194 articles published in the leading PS journals of the countries under study, 58 semi-structured interviews, an auto-ethnographic narrative, as well as other complementary strategies.