A political scientist investigates the claim that the field of post-communist studies is and has been dominated by a transitology paradigm whose teleological biases lead to faulty analysis. Based on a comprehensive analysis of post-communist regime change studies published in 10 leading area studies and comparative politics journals between 1991 and 2003 as well as a broader review of the post-communist transition literature, this article seeks to clarify the terminological confusion that is a prominent feature of critiques of transitology and to examine the claim that a single mode of analysis dominates the study of post-communism.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Sociology and Political Science
- Economics and Econometrics
- Political Science and International Relations