The first issue of the Journal of Political Ideologies appeared in 1996. At that time I was a graduate student at Oxford, in the first year of an MPhil in Politics, and plucking up the courage to ask a certain Dr Michael Freeden if he would supervise a dissertation project on green political theory. I had attended Michael’s undergraduate lectures on political ideology, and as far as I could tell, he was the only member of Oxford faculty, at that time, discussing green politics at all. Thankfully, for me, Michael agreed, and went on to supervise both my MPhil and DPhil theses.
So, although at the time I had little inkling of just how much work had gone into this project, and what it meant for Michael to be editing a new journal, I did get some sense of the excitement surrounding the journal launch, and the intention to, as he put it in his opening editorial, ‘assert the centrality of the study of ideologies as a vital access route to the understanding of the nature of political thought and its bearing on political practice’.Footnote1 During the quarter-century since those words were published, I believe that the journal has played a hugely significant role in achieving exactly that aim, in bringing the study of ideologies from the periphery towards the centre of our understanding of the nature of political thought. Research into political ideologies has flourished in recent decades, a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary locus of inquiry that has the capacity to bring together researchers from political theory, political science, psychoanalysis, sociology, media studies, cultural history, behavioural economics, modern languages and literature, the history of ideas, and more besides. The relationship of ideology to truth, and of its rigidity or flexibility, have become empirical rather than definitional questions, and even then, these are not necessarily seen as the most important questions to ask. Those of us working in this field seek to map, describe, and interpret the complex patterns of political thinking that develop in all societies where the gap between political ideas and political practice must be bridged. These changes, to both the status of ideology studies, and the ways in which it is practiced, are reflected in the articles published in JPI, and stand as a tribute to the roles played both by it, and by its founding editor.
One worry, at the start of any journal’s existence, is whether there will be enough relevant submissions, of sufficient academic quality, to fill the pages. Editors of new journals will actively encourage people working in the field to submit articles, and fret about filling issues. JPI is no longer a start-up, and it is better-placed than ever before in terms of the number of high-quality article submissions being received. This is a very hopeful sign for the future of the study of political ideologies, and for JPI itself. I feel hugely privileged to be taking on the Editor’s role at JPI at a time when it is in such robust health, and I know how fortunate I am to be able to inherit the fruits of the work that has been done since the journal was founded.
In terms of current developments, I am delighted to welcome Marius Ostrowski as the new Online and Social Media Editor for JPI. Our aim is to develop a blog to run alongside the journal, one function of which will be to allow authors of forthcoming pieces to write something short and accessible about the arguments they are making, but the hope is that the blog will also carry independent content on a wide variety of ideology-related topics. We will also expand JPI’s social media presence more generally. I am especially pleased to report that Michael Freeden has agreed to remain with the journal in the role of Founding Editor, still available to offer advice and guidance to members of the current editorial team. Other than that, the format of the journal will remain as before. At a time when we are trying to understand the rise of populism, the political response to a global pandemic, and the impact of the growing influence of identity politics in democratic societies, to name but a few of our difficult contemporary political issues, the existence of a journal devoted to the study of political ideologies, and committed to pluralism in terms of both methodologies and substantive content, seems more necessary than ever. At the outset, the JPI was, as Michael put it in that first editorial, ‘committed to developing the analysis of ideologies as a central component of the scholarly study of political thought, but it is not in the business of laying down a research agenda.’Footnote2 Looking ahead, we will maintain both the commitment and the abstinence expressed there, as we look forward to the next 25 years of ideologies research.
Post-editorial
Twenty-five years is a long time to serve as a journal editor, but those years have been immensely stimulating and rewarding ones for me. I have learnt more than I thought possible about ideologies and ideology studies from the large and diverse number of scholars who were interested enough to submit their research to the JPI. In countless ways, they helped to mould the advance and maturation of this branch of knowledge – as political theory, and as the empirical study of political thought-practices and patterns. The flourishing of the JPI is above all a tribute to them. But it is also a tribute to a dedicated team of associate editors – in alphabetical order: Mathew Humphrey, James Meadowcroft, Marc Stears and Andrew Vincent – who have provided the esprit de corps, enthusiasm and expertise that has propelled the journal and given it strong coherence and a sense of academic mission. Our generous international advisory board, too, have always been on hand to offer their wisdom and guidance. The good will of many scores of article assesors has been indispensable in keeping us on the straight and narrow path of high-quality evaluation and advice. And the support and encouragement of the management team of Routledge/Taylor and Francis has been steadfast and greatly appreciated. Long may all this continue.
Mat Humphrey, who takes over as editor, will bring new energy to this fast-growing field and invest his considerable insights and skill in taking ideology studies, through the JPI, further forwards. The journal is very fortunate in securing his commitment and nous.
The sophistication and scope of ideology theory are constantly being refined and extended while, on a parallel trajectory, new or recalibrated ideological variants are continually lined up for professional scrutiny and, occasionally, dismantling. The JPI is firmly positioned in the midst of these developments as the range of its contributors expands worldwide. What began as a niche and fledgling publication is now recognized as representative of a distinct genre in political theory.
Being an editor always involves hard work, seriousness of purpose, self-questioning of decisions and choices, and late nights. But there also is enormous satisfaction in seeing off an issue to its final publication, and in getting to know, and converse with, an academic community. Not least, I had great fun during my quarter-century experience, and I couldn’t do more than wish the same enjoyment on Mat.
Michael Freeden
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Notes
1. Michael Freeden, ‘Editorial’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 1(1) (1996), pp. 5–13, p. 5.
2. Ibid., p. 10.