Calhoun's Philosophy of Politics: A Study of "a Disquisition on Government" Book

This book is often described as "non-ideological" as though there were some totally objective, non-political way to discuss politics. When, quite simply, there isn't. Any choice a teacher makes in how to discuss an issue or present information is going to entail ideological choices, whether we choose to admit it or not.

What I think the non-ideological descriptor means here is that this book fits well within the dominant frames with which we discuss politics in the U.S. However, that is, in its own way, ideological. The authors present a very narrow view of what democratic politics could be. The discussion here focuses on majoritarianism v. pluralism and is firmly entrenched in a SMDP, two party way of thinking about politics. Even in their comparisons with "other" democratic systems, they choose to compare us to the UK (rather than comparing with a PR/MMP system). As a result, the authors miss an opportunity to illustrate to students that our way of doing democracy is not the only way, the best way, or even a very democratic way.

Since this book leaves other ways of doing democracy completely unexamined and assumes a kind of status quo position vis-a-vis American Politics, it appears "non-ideological" to many. But I couldn't help but feel as though this book was very ideological in that it doesn't offer students the opportunity to think about how we might do democracy differently and better.