Rethinking the Methodological Foundation of Historical Political Science

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 Patterns of Democracy in Context of Historical Political Science

The patterns of democracy are related to the success or failure of national governance; hence, they are a key topic in the theoretical research of political science. It is difficult to comprehend the worldwide political conflicts caused by the promotion of liberal democracy in the study of democratic models that have liberal democracy as their core. The emphasis of historical political science on the genes of civilization provides an opportunity to reinterpret the patterns of democracy. Relying on specific civilization genes, the patterns of democracy can be divided into the “value pattern”, which is shaped by historical civilization genes, and the “practice pattern”, which is based on the “value pattern”. Based on Christian concepts, Western civilization produced liberal democracy as the value pattern, and the value is inherited through the practice pattern of party democracy. Chinese civilization has continued the tradition of people-orientation and consultative practice, establishing socialist democracy in value and consultative democracy in practice. Theoretically, the analytical framework of the value pattern and the practice pattern of democracy illustrates the source of the diverse patterns of democracy, which helps demonstrate the limitations of liberal democracy and points out the possibility of developing a non-liberal democracy pattern.

"China" as an Analytical Concept: A New Beginning for Chinese Political Science

The emergence in recent years of a large number of institutional concepts in the world of Chinese political science indicates that Chinese political science is experiencing an "internal shift" that is different from the complete Westernization of the past. Chinese political scientists are seeking theoretical explanations for China's political development based on China's internal context and are looking to provide intellectual arguments for China's modern state building. In this paper, it is proposed that the core of this internal shift of Chinese political science is the consciousness of "China" as an analytical concept, and that China is not only an object of description, but also an analytical perspective for explaining "what is China". Such a view is different from that held by the European and American left and pure traditional researchers or reactionists. On the one hand, this paradigm provides more universal political knowledge in the sense of comparative political science; on the other hand, it can advance Chinese political research by drawing a clearer and more accurate knowledge map of Chinese politics. The emergence of institutional concepts in Chinese political science implies that Chinese political science as a discipline is increasingly moving from the "form" of discipline establishment to the "content" of "what is China". This signifies a real new beginning.

The Political Development of Contemporary China from the Perspective of Historical Political Science

The political development of contemporary China defies existing political theories. The framework of “political science” based on the ‘rational man hypothesis’ has proven to be fallible in terms of correctly envisioning China’s future. Appertaining to the Chinese political history, historical political science offers not only epistemology and methodology of the subject, but also an ontological element, for observation. With respect to historical political science, contemporary Chinese politics is considered to be the natural genetic extension of the Chinese civilization as well as a continuous and unified development process spanning over a period of 70 years ever since the People’s Republic of China was founded. Historical political science, deemed to be a tailored research approach for the development of contemporary Chinese politics, essentially adds further value and significance to this discipline.

The Paradigm Shift of Political Science from Being “Change-oriented” to “Governance-oriented:” A Perspective on History of Political Science

The history of political philosophy serves as a valuable resource for the current research paradigms in political science. In comparative terms, the paradigm of Western research is essentially “change-oriented” and tends to shift constantly with its evolving thoughts. Due to the influence of bourgeois revolutions around the world, contemporary politics has transpired as the synopsis of governance of the established order. As the “governing strategies” of the established order encounter multiple social crises, the Marxist political science or Marxism has emerged as the naturally preferred alternative research paradigm. During the Cold War period, such governing strategies were adopted as universal values in Western political science, effectuating the prediction of “the end of the history.” After the launch of the reform and opening-up campaign, “change-oriented” liberal democracy became an instrumental paradigm for Chinese political science. However, as the contemporary world order disfavored this paradigm, Chinese scholars shifted their research focus to developing an independent discourse power in democracy and governance, as well as prioritizing state governance as their primary research paradigm and methodology. Thus, political science is expected to resume its common sense nearly after a century of political chaos.

Research Agenda for Political Science in China in an Era of Great Change

The world order is undergoing tumultuous changes amid the Sino–US trade war and a global pandemic. During these epochal times for political science, The American school of social sciences needs an intellectual revolution and a repositioning of the research agenda for political science. Comparative political studies must shift their focus from their traditional role of comparison of political institutions to that of state governance models, as the former can no longer advance new knowledge in political science while the latter represents a greater challenge for such studies. Likewise, studies of international relations in the traditional sense should take a step further and explore studies of world politics, i.e., studies of international relations and world order as shaped by institutional changes triggered by political trends within certain countries. The research approach of historical political science is indispensable, whether it is comparison of state governance models or of world politics.