Chinese Political Science Review最新文献

The basis of a methodology determines whether a research method can fit the core characteristics of a particular academic tradition, and thus, it is crucial to explore this foundation. Keeping in mind the controversy and progress of the philosophy of social sciences, this paper aims to elaborate on four aspects including the cognitive model, the view of causality, research methods, and analysis techniques, and to establish a more solid methodological basis for historical political science. With respect to the "upstream knowledge" of methodology, both positivism and critical realism underestimate the tremendous difference between the natural world and the social world. This leads to inherent flaws in controlled comparison and causal mechanism analysis. Given the constructiveness of social categories and the complexity of historical circumstances, the cognitive model of constructivism makes it more suitable for researchers to engage in macro-political and social analysis. From the perspective of constructivism, the causality in "storytelling," i.e., the traditional narrative analysis, is placed as the basis of the regularity theory of causality in this paper, thus forming the historical-causal narrative. The historical-causal narrative focuses on how a research object is shaped and self-shaped in the ontological historical process, and thus ideally suits the disciplinary characteristics of historical political science. Researchers can complete theoretical dialogues, test hypotheses, and further explore the law of causality in logic and evidence, thereby achieving the purpose of "learning from history" in historical political science.

The Global Justice Index is a multiyear research project based at Fudan Institute for Advanced Study in Social Sciences that assesses the contributions made by each country to achieving greater global justice. In 2019, we completed the first-year measures, using the rankings of nation-states at the global level based on data from 2010 to 2017. This was published under the title of the Global Justice Index Report in Chinese Political Science Review (Vol. 5, No. 3, 2020). The Global Justice Index Report 2020 is the second annual report based on our work, analyzing data from 2010 to 2018, which was concluded in 2020, and published in Chinese Political Science Review (Vol. 6, No. 3, 2021). This is the third annual report in our series, and here, we provide the results with the rankings of promoting global justice by nation-states at the global level based on data in the year of 2019. The report broadly consists of four sections: introduction, findings, main results, and conclusion. In the introduction, we discuss the development of the conceptual framework and evaluative principles to justify our selection of the dimensions and indicators for measurement. Next, in the findings section, we report the data, indicators, and our results for each country for each of the 10 issues we identify, and provide regional comparisons for Asia, Europe, North America, Latin America, Africa, and Oceania. In the following section, we present the main results for the global justice indices, and report the ranking of each country's contribution to achieving greater global justice. In the final section, we discuss the applications and limitations of the index and potential further research trajectories.

There are many approaches in analyzing the prolonged Iran-US impasse. We can taxonomize them into objective and subjective perspectives. We can explain Iran-US tension for realistic and geopolitical reasons. But discourse analysis is a subjective approach that maintains social facts are constructed in a discursive way by social players. This article aims to provide a discursive overview of how the definition of terrorism has been influenced by divergent discourses, as well as conflicting political interests by Iran and the US. In the discursive approach, as what anti-foundationalism maintains, social phenomena and social concepts like terrorism, miss a fixed essence or meaning. The present article applies the term discourse analysis mostly in Foucauldian philosophy and other like-minded political scientists in the deconstruction of the relationship between power and knowledge. This research concludes that definition and determining the instances of terrorism is a discursive action by Iran and the United States, so it explains the subjective reasons why there has been a dichotomy between Iran and the US in characterizing terrorism or 'resistance movements' in the Middle East. Therefore, subjective reasons as much as objective ones play a major role in the Tehran-Washington discord.

Western Political science cannot adequately address China's development in the twenty-first century. The inadequacy is due to a general neglect of historical methods and an obsession with progressive views in the discipline. As a result, the study of China's political culture is torn away from Chinese history and loses itself to become another version of modernization thesis. This article calls for the application of a historical politics approach and a poly-chronic view of history to the study of China's political culture. The article examines four potential core value components of China's political culture, namely the quest for great unification, the preference for political order, the orientation towards substance, and the deference to authority and hierarchy. Results show that those values have historical continuity and China-specificity thereby demonstrating the value of the historical politics perspective.