r/PoliticalScience

I interned for a Governor candidate for my state, and everything went great I was attending events and everything until they wanted me to start door knocking, I love speaking to people and had no problem with this, the issue tho was when my director was getting me set up with the app there was issues with the app, I was brought along to door knock with another director, and after that day I tried with their help to get the issue fixed. I spent about a month trying to get the app fixed, contacted multiple people, and did my due diligence.

After a month of trying I decided to just ask for my letter of reccomendation, (the Governor promised all volunteers letters of reccomendation) and the director gave me a number in which I got in contact with, and they told me that they campaign had approved and would do my letter of reccomendation, she then passed me onto another number and told me to get in contact with them. I’ve spent two months trying to get in contact with nothing from his end, and she tried to help me enthusiastically.

Fast forward to today, I get a call from him saying that the letter of reccomendation was denied, he was very short tempered and annoyed, I simply asked what the reason was and if I could appeal the decision, and he got upset with me and irate saying that he denied it and I was bothering him and the woman and that she didn’t even work for the campaign. (keep in mind I was given her number by my director and she never mentioned saying she wasn’t apart of the campaign) I apologized to him and tried to remain professional, I told him that I was told by her that the campaign approved and would do the letter, to which he bluntly said no and called me a liar, and when I mentioned I got her number from my director he also said I didn’t. He told me to stop contacting him as I was annoying him.

The candidate is probably going to win Governor as he is already the GOP candidate. I’ve spent months trying to get everything in order just to get shot down in 20 seconds. Is there anything yall reccomend I should do?

Hello everyone,
I don’t know if it’s too early, but I would like to know what I should focus on in the future so I can achieve this goal.
To give you some background, I am from Serbia and I finished high school this June. I got accepted into Classics at Sapienza in Rome (which is a good university in Europe, at least that’s what I think, and it is also regarded as the number one university for Classics in the world). While I’m there, I’m planning to take some extra courses in politics or something similar. Right now, I am learning Italian, and in college I will take French. I heard that knowing many languages is good for jobs and postgraduate studies in global affairs.
I’m probably going to do some sports too. I don’t know if that matters, but I’m lowkey passionate about it, so I’m going to do it anyway.
Also, since most applicants have some job experience, after those three years in Classics, I’m planning to find a job related to an MPP, either helping with some tasks or, if I can get to that position, doing research.
I’m also planning to take some courses in economics this summer, as well as some related to politics, just so I can get an overview, since my major is not directly tied to politics, although I think it is a great base for further education.
My real question is: what else should I do during those three years? How do I “peak”?

I remember vaguely in political science courses just touching on how the USA is an individualistic country, while China is collectivist. Never thought much of it. But why? Of course Chinas government plays a hand and the general culture pushes collectivism. But it’s a more poor country than the USA(for now) and the population is collectivist.

The US is wierd though. The US government promotes both individualism and collectivism. Its media and government promotes elements of both.

Could it be argued that with a more expensive economy, people are just like screw it I don’t care about my fellow man and vote not to have social welfare programs or things that would improve other people’s lives?

But for example, look at the southern republican states. They are regarded as hospitable and friendly but consistently vote in a manor that is all for the individual and screws everyone else. (Tax cuts for themselves and reduce spending on poor or free school lunches )

Is It Just me or does october 7 Resemble 9/11 in some way? Not in severity of event, but rather in the reaction and aftermath, a form of public hysteria that allowed reactionary political forces to take Place and implement a state of even more permanent warfare by implementing what Is essentially lynch-mob mentality in foreing policy, with a nice Dash of racism/islamophobia to boot? I tried asking this question in another reddit thread with... Subpar results, mainly due to the controversial nature of the events, so if you think I missed something in the analysis of either event, please explain. As previously stated, i know next to nothing about political science or geopolitics, so any input Is greatly appreciated.

​I need to vent, and honestly, I’m looking for some solidarity or advice from people who share my background.

​I have a background in Political Science and public policy framework analysis. For a long time, I loved preying into institutional mechanics, structural reforms, and system analysis. But lately, my professional lens has turned into a personal curse.

​I live in Israel, and watching the current political system and its ongoing institutional collapse has triggered a profound, clinical depression in me. I’m currently on medication, trying to pull myself out of a deep episode, but my brain refuses to switch off.

​The problem with having an academic background in this field is that you lose the luxury of blissful ignorance. Where an average person sees bad news, I see the anatomy of failure. I see the deliberate dismantling of checks and balances, systemic sabotage, and policies implemented in direct defiance of everything political science teaches us about stability and governance.

​It feels like a permanent Cassandra complex. You know exactly why and how the ship is sinking, you see the parameters leading to the crash, but you are entirely powerless to stop it. My intellect, which used to be my strength, is now being weaponized by my depression to prove that everything is hopeless. It feels less like a career and more like a chronic occupational disease—a form of institutional despair.

​I'm trying to practice cognitive offloading and limit my news intake, but when you live inside the system that is actively breaking its own laws, it’s incredibly hard.

​Has anyone else experienced this specific type of professional deformation? How do you separate your analytical brain from your personal mental health when the objective reality around you is spiraling?

​Would love to hear from fellow political scientists, students, or analysts who feel trapped in this exact same trap. Thanks for reading.

I have been studying the United States and it’s 250 years of existence and I’ve been coming to some conclusions a lot of people won’t like.

But I was wondering what is being taught in this particular study? Have they led you to uncomfortable truths too? And tell me what the most important thing is for the continuity of our Republic?

This investigation raises a policy question about accountability, not just destruction. EU taxpayers funded hospitals, desalination plants, schools and other civilian infrastructure in Gaza and the West Bank that EUobserver reports were later bombed, bulldozed or seized by Israel, with no repayment to the EU.

The key issue is incentives: if Brussels limits itself to diplomatic letters while continuing normal relations, what stops the same pattern from repeating during future reconstruction?

It also puts EU governments in a difficult position — funding Palestinian infrastructure, then absorbing the cost when it is destroyed, without imposing financial or political consequences.

Hii! I was wondering if any of you could recommend me some good political books. I plan on studying public relations or political science in the future but I want to read some books about current or past events to get a better understanding about it all. Also if you guys could also recommend me some books on Palestine, I myself am Palestinian and would like to read some professional books on it but please be respectful!

I’m a Poli Sci major, and my congressional district is probably the most competitive district in the country. Should I work for the moderate dem or the republican.

I’m a moderate dem/neo liberal but i’m worried that the seat will get flipped. I have a lot of connections with Republican party/candidate office in our district and none with the democrat. However i do have one connection with our senators office in DC who’s a Democrat.

My short term goal is to work on capitol hill after I graduate. And my long term career goals are to work in foreign policy, and i’m far more aligned with republican foreign policy than democrat.

As the title says, i want to hold a lot of knowledge in terms of international, and national (indian) politics. I want to be well versed in mythologies (Indian, Greek and egyptian). I want to have my own opinions, be able to analyse scenarios, have ideologies and beliefs. I want to be able to argue, have facts in the tip of my fingers to argue, not with rage, but with knowledge.

What i need is sources. There are a lot of free resources online, i know where to look, what I dont know is where do I begin and what do i need? I know for sure I need to read newspapers. Thats current affairs, how do i find out and learn about everything thats happened already? What are some trustworthy resources i can rely on? I want to enhance my English enough to argue well, articulate my opinion. When I say argument, im talking about the government schemes, policies, the stance india took back in the times in 19th, 20th centuary, he real estate, the social standards for real estate for women, things like that. I want to understand people better, the reason why people make the decisions they do, I want to understand the kind of society that people will build. I want to understand the origins of religions, the point they've gotten to, they way countries are tied to religion, its impact on women and other socially weak sections. I want to know about LGBTQ rights better, the point the movement has gotten them to, the laws that are modified etc., I want to have knowledge and opinions on ESG too. I want to know about the historical figures of India. The things they did, the views they had, their approach.

about me: im F20 from a southern tier 1 city in india studying in a tier 2 college. I come from a middle class family. I aim to pursue higher studies, as a back plan, PSU. My final aim for career is PSU after high studies as well. That doesnt change much.

I would appreciate any suggestions, resources, guides and honest opinions.

Ps: idk what flair to use for this.

I am currently working on my Master’s degree in Public Management (with a Bachelor's in Political Science). While I love the field, I am realizing that my home country is too culturally traditional and family-oriented for the lifestyle I want to build. I want to leave and find work abroad, but I’m hitting a massive wall regarding how transferable this degree actually is.

​Public management and political science feel deeply tied to the specific bureaucratic and legal structures of the country you study in. Most government jobs require citizenship, leaving foreign nationals locked out of standard public sector career paths.

​I want to know if anyone here has successfully immigrated to another country (especially in Europe) using this specific academic background.

Hi everyone, I’m an undergraduate student majoring in political science, and I was majoring in biology but decided to stop doing so(my parents thought it best to just stick to one because I want to go to law school). Anyway I wanted to ask a question about the rigor of political science as taught at the university level. So in general if one asks the question of what is more difficult between STEM and social sciences, then, with some exceptions(Econ and linguistics being most notable) most people tend to agree that STEM is harder.

But I don’t believe STEM is intrinsically harder. After all I don’t believe one simply reads leviathan and immediately assumes that the concepts discussed in that book by Thomas Hobbes are somehow less difficult to understand than first year chemistry concepts. But I do agree that STEM classes require more of their students than their social science peers, and I believe this is very true for political science. For instance when I was taking Organic Chemistry we had a quiz every week or every other week, and an exam at the end of about 3 weeks. We also had weekly labs and a great deal of homework(although often not graded homework for lots of teachers). But this isn’t true for political science.

And this got me thinking: If political science is Leas rigorous, than our peers in STEM(and the same is general true for most, albeit not all, Social Science and Humanities classes), then that must hurt us as students in some way. It must mean that lots of people who aren’t particularly knowledgeable of the material are able to pass and succeed, when this shouldn’t be the case. And personally I think that could potentially bring less legitimacy to the field, or lead to employers taking political science majors less seriously than their peers in STEM or other more rigorous degrees.

So my question is, is Political science not rigorous at the university level, and, if so, should it take steps to becoming more so?

After studying some towns in the shadow of major cities like London, Paris, and Geneva, I have found in most cases, that they have surged to the populist right in recent elections. But it is not that the populist right is surging everywhere, and it is not as people suggest an even surge across countries. It appears to be specific to regions in the shadow or commuter area of major cities, that experienced perhaps explosive growth in the past 5-10 years, while continuing to exist at the same level of infrastructure for a much smaller population. We are largely seeing a reversing of trends of hyper-urbanization which led to the disproportionate neglect of small towns and rural areas in the latter half and especially latter quarter of the 20th Century, and this neglected infrastructure cannot keep up with this neo-periurban demand.

This does not appear to impact major cities, because though the demand is high, there is a wider area and room for slack in the market, so if someone senses they are priced out of an area they can easily move to another area. But it may not be so easy for someone in a town near that city that experienced a surge in demand. Likewise, in a big city with lots of immigration, you could get used to that amount, but if you are not used to that amount of immigration, a small surge in population of immigrants--many of whom will be priced out of these larger cities if they are recent arrivals coming during the surge in rental prices--seems like a bigger difference for a smaller town. These smaller towns usually tend to be commuter towns, where people live in the area and work in the big city that leans left. Historically these commuters would have leaned left as well. But they too have begun to be affected by a surge in rent, as both locals and immigrants priced out of the big city flee to the surrounding periphery/commuter shadow.

This skyrocketing demand in a small area, in contrast to the much larger big city, may cause increased competition for jobs and housing in the periphery of major cities--a struggle historically done in the inner city in the High Industrial Epoch. (This was the context of the emergence, for example, of trade unionism and industrial syndicalism in the early 20th Century. Today there is a dislocation between the centres of socialist parties--in the hub of major cities, or in autonomous isolated towns, and may be why they cannot mobilize the lower-middle class today--disparate from the most dangerous area of this competition, the periurban town.)

By contrast, isolated larger towns that are more autonomous tend to remain left-wing, and like big cities, very rural areas are likely to remain more stable across elections (whether it is left or right). These are basically socio-economic islands that are essentially unaffected by the developments in big cities and their respective peripheries.

In other words it may not be so much the cost of living crisis causing the surge in the populist right, but perhaps people in the middle and lower-middle of society who cannot afford to live in the big city sensing that things are changing faster than they can adapt.

For example, it may explain why people with the same rate of change of NATIONAL immigration and rental prices may vote left in one area but right in another, and this may explain why not everyone responds to the current socioeconomic situation the same way.

This may also explain why despite efforts in countries like the UK and France to control or reduce the rate of immigration, support for their centre or left-wing governments has in some cases declined and support for the populist right parties continued to increase.

I would like to know if this theory is in line with the latest research, because this appears to be replicated across countries (at least by a glance at the data, I have not performed any statistical tests), but I have not yet seen anyone talk about the effect of the combination of the cost of living WITH the centre of gravity or shadow of a city on voting for the populist right. This in turn, could be a correction to the typical purely materialist, or purely cultural analyses of the surge in right wing populism in recent years, by combining both factors, and demonstrates that a political discourse focusing purely on a supply-versus-demand side debate over big city developments misses the nuances in nationwide voting blocs.

Hey!! Looking for some advice from other poli sci graduates on where I should look towards the future based on my current stats. I like to dream big, and sometimes I need a bonk on the head from reality to help me reaally lock in lol.

I'm currently pursuing a double major in sociology and poli sci with a concentration in international relations and humanitarian aid at my small Florida school. My goal after graduating would be to look into grad school, and the ones currently on my (very ambitious) list include Georgetown, Yale, MIT, George Washington, and Columbia, and I just need a reality check and some advice on where I should proceed to get me where I wanna be.

So far, what I have going for me is:

- 3.8 GPA & graduating a year early from my degree

- Steady internship with my local Democratic Party for 6 months and ongoing

- Connections to my local candidates and party chairs (so no lack of sources to get letters of recommendation from)

- A genuine love for academic writing and research

Any and all advice is welcome! Thank you, friends.

I’m going back to my education after more than 2 years in hiatus. Long story short, I might be enrolled in political science for this upcoming school year. I’m really unsure because I don’t wanna do law school and I don’t really know what to do with that degree. What careers are possible for pol sci?

I really want to try and get an actual job in a field that I enjoy and leave the full time job I have that has nothing to do with my degree. What would be a better degree for me to pursue?

When the ruling elite is wiped out, political instability is guaranteed. I want to understand the trajectory of such a society. If the old system is completely erased and the overthrowing faction does not seize control, where does that society realistically go? Are there any historical precedents or political theories that explain this scenario?

Could a newer, even more sophisticated and brutal dictatorship rise to take its place? Or could it become a society that appears peaceful on the surface but is actually a ticking time bomb waiting to explode from within? What are the possible outcomes?

Thanks everyone for your answers!

I'm basically in depression right now due to my joblessness .

I was always good in academics but now the classmates who basically used to fail are doing better and I just stay inside My room and do nothing.

I can't switch to other fields rn , have given UGC NET in India. Cracked without jrf but as a general category student , this too has earned me nothing. ph.D in Indian universities are a scam right now .

You basically need to oil your professors or should be in a lobby .

I am completely hopeless with my life . I don't even know how to move to abroad as none is there to guide me . What shall I do :) if anyone can help it would mean a lot . Thankyou.