Tocqueville and the Ostroms

Abstract

Although it is commonplace for political scientists to draw upon historical thinkers and the ‘great books’ of the past, the practice of using historical works as reference points for contemporary issues remains under-investigated. To address this practice, this article is positioned at the crossroads of social science and intellectual history. By examining the relationship of political economists Elinor and Vincent Ostrom with Alexis de Tocqueville, the article demonstrates some of the potential risks incurred by social scientists drawing on historical thinkers. After exploring the similarities between the Ostroms and Tocqueville, it identifies three key pitfalls of the Ostroms’ ‘Tocquevillian’ rhetoric. These pitfalls result in obscuring meaning and overlooking philosophical insights, both of which detract from the Ostroms’ project. Insights from the field of intellectual history are offered. A final section presents a key example of Vincent Ostrom overlooking Tocqueville's thought where Tocqueville's insights were directly applicable to his work. The article parses political science's relationship with the past and offers a critique that is applicable beyond Tocqueville and the Ostroms.

Literary allusion in sociological analysis: Mass Observation mantelpiece reports as epic and drama

“…However, focusing on it for interesting quotations or historical snapshots, taken out of context, risks using it merely as a ‘treasure trove’ (Sheridan, 1996: 1). As well as a wide variety of forms of writing, Mass Observation materials include photographs, paintings, drawings and sketches, and its visuality was an aim from the outset (Madge and Jennings, 1937: 90), leading to ongoing interest in the Archive's aesthetics and forms of representation (Curzon, 2017; Pollen, 2022).…”