particular situations (Johnson 1991 ), thereby illuminating one of the peren-
nial questions in political theory. And despite the frequent description of
rational choice theory as value free, it has provided for plenty of normative
theorizing among its practitioners. Arch-positivist Riker ( 1982 b) deploys
Arrow’s social choice theory to argue that democracy is inherently unstable
and meaningless in the outcomes it produces, and uses this to back a
normative argument on behalf of a minimal liberal democracy that allows
corrupt or incompetent rules to be voted out—but nothing more. The
conclusions of rational choice theory are often bad news for democracy
(Barry and Hardin 1982 ); but it is possible to reinterpret this ediWce in
terms of critical theory, as showing whatwouldhappen if everyone behaved
according to microeconomic assumptions. The political challenge then be-
comes one of how to curb this destructive behavioral proclivity (Dryzek
1992 ). There are many other connections between rational choice theory
and political theory, exploratory as well as critical; we only touch on them
in this Handbookbecause they will be more extensively reviewed in The
Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, also in this series.
Leading comparativist Bo Rothstein ( 2005 ) has expressed the worry that
the empirical arm of the discipline has lost its moral compass. To use his
running example, its ‘‘technically competent barbarians’’ would have no
defense against lining up in support of a political force like Nazism, should
that be expedient. Rothstein himself sees the remedy in political theory: ‘‘The
good news is that, unlike other disciplines, I think we have the solution within
our ownWeld of research. This, I believe, lies in reconnecting the normative
side of the discipline—that is, political philosophy—with the positive/em-
pirical side’’ ( 2005 , 10 ). Despite the likelihood of some resistance to this from
both sides of the divide, the examples discussed above suggest that such
connection (or reconnection) is indeed possible.
5 Organization of theHandbook
.........................................................................................................................................................................................
We turn now to the way we have organized thisHandbook. Part II, ‘‘Contem-
porary Currents,’’ assesses the impact, and considers the likely future trajec-
tory, of literature that proved especially inXuential in framing debate through
30 john s. dryzek, bonnie honig & anne phillips