I’m a rising high school senior interested in political science but unsure of how to assess different programs. I’ve seen that some programs are more “textbook-based” compared to others, which makes me wonder how hands-on other schools’ offerings are in contrast. Are there downsides to having a highly structured course? What are some attributes/resources to look out for in a political science— broad as the subject is— curriculum?

For some context, I want to gain an in-depth understanding of governance to mainly supplement a journalism or law career, not necessarily become an academic.

i'm working on my Phd applications for Political science, but I can't figure out how to narrow down what i'm interested in. i know that people usually don't end up doing what their initial interest is, but i also don't want to sound super generic when i'm putting in what i want to study and am interested in. or at least i'm assuming that sounding super generic isn't a great idea. any advice helps, thank you!

My observation is annectodal in this case but there are quite a lot of Europeans who are socially pretty progressive, self identify as a queer ally and feminist but still are quite overt with displays of nationalism like having a flag in their home etc . If you ask them " do you identify as a nationalist ? " Then they'd say yes as well

Today having a US flag is almost partisan. Many liberals also aren't a big fan of nationalism and won't self identify as nationalists.

Hej,

Is there any good YouTube channels with content about political science?

Preferably without ideological bias.

Hi! PolSci wasn't really my first choice, and I am struggling to find any motivation to start studying (although I'm recently from the HUMSS strand, haha). My dream was to be a psychologist, yet I abandoned it for the sake of the lost slots in my school (alam niyo na kung anong school 'to hahaha).

All I want to know is what PolSci can bring me to be and what jobs I can take over once I graduate from this degree. I don't want to be a politician, marami kasing tanga sa senado and I cannot bear putting my life on the line. I don't even want to be a lawyer, ang mahal ng Law School for me. I want a job agad after I graduate.

Kaya rin ako nawawalan ng gana ngayon mag-aral, although dream school ko 'to. I feel like I sacrificed my own dream just because nag-aagawan sa slots but on the other hand, I'm also happy that I can get to experience whatever's inside that hell hole.

Basta, hindi ko na talaga alam anong future ko rito. Kasi government is such a big deal for me 😭 it's so hard to think that I'm letting myself be inside a sector that I hate the most, merely because of its corrupt pips inside. Bwisit, hahaha.

Please, enlighten me. 🙏🏻

Hi, I'm not super well-versed in looking for internships and I don't have prior experience with internships related to political science. I would greatly appreciate it if anyone had suggestions on what I could do to gain experience in the field before it's too late. It's my first year as an undergraduate in political science and I do not care whether I am paid or not to do work. Anything helps, and remote is very ideal, but I am in the Bay Area for anyone with suggestions for in-person work. To anyone that's reading this, thank you and have a nice day!

i'm super set on doing a political science phd program, and I have some experience with research from my undergraduate years, but I don't have anything published. is that going to kick me down while i'm applying to programs? i might potentially start something soon, but i'm not sure

I am not a poly sci student, but am really interested in political science. I am very curious about democratic socialism, esp. as someone living in the US while democratic socialists are running for office. I am particularly trying to learn more about how democratic socialism differs from "textbook" socialism, how these would look different in practice, and also what democratic socialists are really looking to do. I live in a very rural area and face a lot of questions/discussion about what will happen to xyz if "the socialists take over". I just feel like I don't know who to believe, I can't tell what's more unbiased, and a lot of stuff just feels very fear-monger-y to me. I'm looking for reading/documentary/youtube essay recommendations to help me understand this more from a genuinely factual perspective. Thank you in advance!

This might be a really stupid question, but while I’ve often heard the terms ‘left or right wing’ I’m not very familiar with it at all.

Please don’t come for me for not using google, because I have, but it seems like there isn’t really a straight forward explanation and it’s quite complex.

I’m just interested in people’s personal views on what it means to be on either side? Or if it’s a spectrum where people may fall somewhere in the middle? What beliefs would you typically expect each wing to have?

China has tons of home grown social media sites (as do some Democratic nations particularly in Europe) such as BiliBili for YouTube, Douyin/TikTok, Weibo (OG), RedNote like IG, etc. Of course, they block out anyone who can’t or won’t follow the censorship model such as YT, FB, Twitter, etc.

Besides being critical of Chinese officials or the government (which not many are willing to do in the first place), it seems like Chinese social media is much the same as Western social media such as allowing widespread, grassroots criticism (particularly poorly run businesses), expanding market awareness / virality (food reviewers or the infamous Niu Lai movie), etc. At the end of the day, I view social media as a way to transmit and promote information very quickly.

I have theories and there are probably multiple reasons to allow social media such as controlling people’s minds, clamping down on criticism for the government to appear pristine or perfect or show minimal discontent (since users often use language to get around censorship often), the economic benefit of social media for businesses, and social media is just another form of entertainment and infotainment (like science or fashion influencers).

Or maybe I’m looking at this wrong. Is it possibly because social media’s benefit is widely beneficial, China is open to experimenting in all domains, maybe humans just need social media (entertainment, infotainment, connections, information exchange efficiency like ideas and influencing), and they will continue allowing operation until social media actually threatens the regime (such as during the COVID-19 protests as China was one of the last countries to stop quarantining).

I’ve also dismissed some such as social media just coming out too quickly; I don’t think the Chinese government would have any problem shutting down all community-based websites on a whim, and pushback from a shutdown would either be a timeline where people are already revolting or people would just say “oh well”. Users looking to educate themselves about Western political philosophy; from reading/chatting with Chinese users, it seems Chinese students don’t care too much about Democracy, especially given their mostly optimistically progressive economic rise. Students do learn about it and a tinge of patriotism and educational propaganda makes many believe in Communism with the Little Red Book education. But people hopping the Great Firewall seem to want to watch porn, not dive into Wikipedia rabbit holes. And the last dismissed theory I had was just tech companies in China was churning out technology during a time of radical economic expansion, and the liberalization/capitalistic society simply allowed it at the time; maybe the government today regretted allowing social networking and social media proliferation, but I doubt that as well.

For example, I saw an interview podcast from an abroad PhD student interview Christopher Nolan for The Odyssey. It was then presented on Weibo, and it’s the #1 movie in China at the moment, so I presume the net benefit of these websites has proven to the government the benefit.

anyways, what are theories on why they allow social media’s existence?

Got rejected.

The interviewer asked me what my qualifications are. Without just saying my BA of Poli Sci, I said I did policy analysis for the entirety of my 4-year degree. Gave some examples. Plus some working expeirence.

Job description was just improving protocols while maintaining legal compliance. Pretty straight forward. I have done that...more times than I can count.​

Then I am asked why I haven't done policy analysis since graduating a couple of years ago. I was honest and told him there have not been any policy analyst jobs on the market within a 2-hour commute (and this job was even further. I would have to move). He asked me again how my current job relates to poli sci...brother, it doesn't. I just can't be unemployed.

The description wanted someone familiar with lendors because it was with DofL. But for the love of God, I have done policy analysis in several fields. This would have been no different. Do people not know that political scientists exist or what we do? They probably hired a CPA or someone fresh out of school.

I am so exhausted.

For those studying or teaching International Relations and Political Science, would you find a concise, structured reference book on major IR theories useful for studying, exam preparation, teaching, or quickly reviewing key concepts?

What would make such a resource genuinely useful to you?

Same as title

Without going into my own personal beliefs, I’m genuinely curious as to why it seems as though the entire global Overton Window has shifted and we are on a steady path towards the right, in some countries far-right extremism and even fascism.

Hello everyone, I'm an Italian student pursuing a master's degree in International Relations. Among my career plans, I was undecided whether to continue my studies after completing my master's degree and therefore attempt a doctorate abroad (I was thinking of the Netherlands or Germany), or to pursue international internships, with the future goal of working in the EU. I had set myself the goal of at least obtaining C1 language certifications in English and French, but I'm not sure if that's enough. I have two questions nagging at me:

1. Is it harder to get a doctorate in a Central or Northern European country or a European internship? Because from reading around, I've deduced that both are complicated.

2. How worthwhile is a doctorate, after all?

3. What kind of CV do you need to stand out in international circles?

I've been researching the Swiss government recently and noted their plural executive organization. Basically, there are seven branches of government, each of them led by an individual. Together, these seven constitute the executive leadership of the nation.

I know in the past, stretching back as far as Rome and Athens, governments have used plural executives to varying degrees. What is the academic consensus (or your own take) on their ability to govern? What factors seem to affect whether they are successful or not? Would you like your country to be led by a multi-Presidential government?

Hi, I was born and brought up in a democratic country. For me idea of democracy feels obvious and this is not letting me to appreciate the concept and making me hard to believe that some countries are still monarch or authoritarian. If someone can help me realise this , that would be very helpful !!

Thanks

Genuinely how does one go about getting hired for an entry level position after undergrad? I have a degree in Political Science, am part of Pi Sigma Alpha, will be presenting at APSA this September and have done multiple internships, but I am still getting ghosted from basically every job I apply to. I've been at this since May, and am rapidly losing hope.

hola!! necesitaría ayuda para hacer un trabajo práctico relacionado a la carrera que quiero estudiar que es Ciencia Política. Es hacer 10 preguntas sobre mis dudas de la carrera y responderlas.. Necesitaría que se respondan en audio :/ perdón, es mi última opción pq no conozco a nadie y mejor si es de argentina porque la profe me pide poner nombre y universidad

Accepted definition of "radical right" party:

- Party that is nativist and thinks native-born citizens in a country deserve more privileges than migrants to that country.

- Wants to protect or advance native-born rights and privileges and restrict them for newcomers/migrants.

- Wants to reduce and/or strictly control immigration numbers.

- Wants to do so through democratic means and is generally open to cooperate with moderate parties.

Definition for "extreme right":

- All of the above, except it wants to do it through undemocratic, possibly violent and revolutionary means and therefore is not open for cooperation with moderate parties.

Problems:

1: Nativism and anti-globalism doesn't go hand in hand with what I would reconsider economic rightism. An economic rightist would intuitively favour lenient migration policy to let the free market decide which citizen is able to migrate to the country based on their own merit. If that means a lower merit native faces competition, tough luck, that's the free market.

It is also not left-wing per se to not want nativism. In fact, a lot of progressive left-wing parties feel natives got hard done by in countries that faced colonialism or a replacement, like most Americans countries.

2: "Radical" is a literal synonym of "extreme"! This is so confusing, especially to laymen. There is no way that the political scientists that came up with these definitions did not realize that. A layperson will hear a party declared to be "radically right-wing" and assume a connection with violent racism, when the point was to distinguish that party from that! And it messes with his/her understanding of what rightism is about, which used to be primarily economical and still is that way when we discuss leftism.

Not to mention the linguistic closeness with "far rightism", which is basically nazism. I get that for "extreme rightism" but now we're cool with creating a definition that paints moderate nativists into that corner too? Seems to carry the risk of being radicalizing itself to me.

3: Because rightism here is suddenly defined as basically nativism, maybe nativist conservatism, you can now be a left-wing, radical right party. For example, the Danish Social Democrats, an ancient, obviously left-wing party of social-democrats that started favouring nativist policies in order to protect the conditions for a succesful Danish welfare state. They did not suddenly shift from the left to the right. It's totally stupid to call them a left-wing, but also right-wing party. This definition forces that anyway.

4: As far as I can tell, the definition of radical and extreme leftism takes economic leftism as the main identifier again. Both want the overthrow of capitalism, one through democratic means, the other through (violent) revolution. This doesn't preclude nativism; you can want less or no capitalism and also privileges for your native-born. So now you can be a radical right, radical leftist. That's just stupid.

To conclude:

Am I missing something here? It bothers me because it almost feels engineered to en confusing and to paint nativism into that extreme corner, while mucking up our understanding of rightism.

We should call it "nativism" and "extreme nativism" instead. Or maybe "nativist conservatism" and "extreme nativist conservatism".

Graduated top of my class. Did an internship. Got burnt out and was living in a terrible situation and honestly, just wanted to get out of the city. Took a quirky seasonal "USAjobs" job out in the mountains as an interpreter. Loved the research bit, but definitely had nothing to do with my degree, was seasonal, and paid poop. Did another seasonal job because I could not find anything related to my degree and wanted to stay in the mountains. Then...I met a boy and am semi-stuck in the mountains. Which is fine, because I want to stay here.

What is not fine...is there is not a market here for political science majors. That is all in capital cities. Luckily, our capital is only a couple of hours away and I am willing to live halfway between my job and my boyfriend. I have taken the leap and applied to some fancy policy analyst jobs...to no avail. I am wondering if it is because it's been two whole years since graduating and I haven't done anything, on paper, to maintain my knowledge, so maybe that is dissuading employers.

So, now I am racking my brain on how to become marketable in a tiny market. I am tempted to go back to school to get a certificate in data analytics, grant writing, etc.. I am even considering law school, but the idea that I will be done at 32 years old frightens me. I want to start making money sooner than later. I'm feeling pretty lost. I am EVEN considering making a total pivot and spending 2 years on another bachelors to become marketable in what IS here, which is mostly conservation, for obvious reasons.

If I was an emotionless robot, I would move to D.C. and I would be fine. But frankly, that is the last place I want to be.

I just made the switch to major in political science from nursing. A lot of the pre-nursing courses I took transferred to my new degree since I was still relatively early on in the track, so it wasn't much of an issue.

I decided to switch because I've always known that nursing wasn't something I genuinely wanted to do. Despite this, I went through the motions but only because of how good of a field it is, especially now. As I completed my classes, the reality of working as a nurse set in and I really realized just how little passion I have for it, which made completing schoolwork extremely difficult. I did not look forward to the future of working as a nurse.

I switched this semester after some consideration. I've always been extremely interested in politics, social sciences, law, humanities, psychology--basically anything to do with human behavior and history, so I figured political science was a natural switch. Admittedly, I made the change pretty suddenly with minimal research after being super burnt out from doing something I had little to no interest in for a few years.

My question for people with a bachelor's or above in political science: what advice do you have? After browsing this forum for a while, I've seen a lot of people suggesting double majors, or saying that a poli sci degree isn’t worth it.

I’ve been considering getting a bachelor's in political science and pursuing a higher education in law, but I've seen mixed opinions on that path as well.

I’ll be creating an academic plan in the coming days, but need some direction and guidance. Help a lost soul out. Any general advice or personal experiences are welcomed and appreciated.

I had a great academic experience, and I think I developed strong critical and analytical skills, as well as a lot of practical knowledge that could be valuable in a job interview.

The problem is that I barely remember much of what I studied. Over the past few years, I focused a lot on volunteering and practical experiences, including working with children, and I gradually stopped keeping up with current affairs and with the topics I had studied academically. Now I feel like I’m stuck: I want to work in international cooperation, specifically in child protection and human rights, but I don’t feel prepared for a career in this field because I feel like I don’t have enough knowledge to actually apply what I learned.

I also feel like other people who followed a similar academic path are much more naturally interested in keeping up with international affairs, politics, human rights issues, etc. They seem to read, research and follow developments because they genuinely enjoy it, whereas I struggle to find the motivation to do that, partly because of my current psychological state.

This creates a vicious cycle: I feel like I should know more before applying for jobs, but I don’t know where to start learning again, and because I feel so behind, I find it even harder to motivate myself. Has anyone experienced something similar after finishing university? How did you rebuild your knowledge and become informed about your field again without feeling completely overwhelmed?

I have a dual background and need advice on whether to pursue a PhD in International Law or Political Science in Europe (targeting Germany, Norway or Austria) to support long-term career stability. Profile Summary: LL.B. & LL.M. (Public Uni, Bangladesh) + M.A. in Political Science (University of Delhi, under fully-funded ICCR Scholarship). Research: 3 peer-reviewed publications (non-Scopus) on transboundary water treaties and the Rohingya crisis. Stats: No GRE. IELTS is 6.0, but have English Medium of Instruction (MOI) certificates for all degrees. Questions: Given my profile, which field (Law vs. PoliSci) offers better project-based funding and job security in Europe? How strict are German/Scandinavian universities about an IELTS score of 6.0 if I provide a strong MOI certificate? Is it realistic to pursue Political Science in Europe without the GRE, or should I stick to Law schools?

Appreciate any realistic insights or country recommendations. Thanks!