IR/Global Politics/Comparative Politics at LSE

Of the three, IR is probably (perhaps almost definitely) the best. Global politics and comparative both fall within the government/politics department, which isn't as strong as the IR dept. Differences....well, think of it this way. Look at the course list. If it says empire or something like that, it's comparative. If it says anything about a regional focus or war, it's IR. That matters because many courses are cross-listed and technically open to all students, but you stand a better chance of getting into the seminars (as distinguished from the lectures) if you're from within the department.

Generally, IR has the better reputation, although I know some really cool people who did Comparative. Don't know anyone who did global politics though. My (extremely unscientific) impression is that the IR department more carefully selects admittants, and therefore has a bit better quality student going in. Plus, the professors are generally a bit better. However, seeing as how in MScs you're really learning from the other students, that isn't as big of a factor (though still an important one!).

Reply 2

unknown demon

15

ShadyLane does global politics at Lse maybe you should pm her.

Reply 3

16

Global Politics is based in government but is interdisciplinary. Its focus is globalization. I've done 2 development studies classes and one in economic history. Only done one in government--our required course.

I love GP and am glad I decided to come to LSE (I considered other unis because I wasn't sure about Global Politics as I think the title sounds very stupid).

I have an IR degree at undergrad but I didn't like the courses for the IR MSc so I didn't apply. Don't worry about quality, just choose the course you like the most, as they're all good, and most of the time you'll be in classes with people from a variety of MSc programs anyway.

Reply 4

Alan Smithee

shady lane

I love GP and am glad I decided to come to LSE (I considered other unis because I wasn't sure about Global Politics as I think the title sounds very stupid).

It's Global

It's Politics

Reply 5

The Boosh

17

Chuck Norris once punched a man in the soul.

Reply 6

OP

Thanks for the replies. They've helped to clarify a couple of issues.

Reply 7

16

oregon

I noticed the global politics course is already closed, is it the most prestigious/popular? The LSE website hasn't updated its stats for awhile about applicant:intake ratios so I am not sure.

It's very popular and getting more so, because it's so interdisciplinary. I've got a job in finance, while others are going to international organizations, NGOs, law school, etc. Also, the convenor of the course is probably the leading globalization scholar in the world right now--David Held. Mary Kaldor is a big scholar on civil society and conflict, and she runs the Civil Society stream of the degree. Those profs are the reason that a good chunk of the students on the course chose LSE. A lot of my friends on other MScs have told me they wished they were in GP because of the flexibility we have in designing our own course of study.

Reply 8

unknown demon

15

is there an option to do an economics related module?

Reply 9

OP

Do the 3 courses vary much in terms of size? (i.e. number of students).

Reply 10

Then again, everyone wants to do IR at LSE for the prestige. :p:

As for size, my course was 85 people. I've heard the year after me was 100, but I don't think that's right. I'm fairly certain that the department caps it at 85.

Reply 11

16

unknown demon

is there an option to do an economics related module?

Yes, I take a course in the Economic History department.

Reply 12

poliwog

Hi,

I was accepted into the LSE comparative politics program, and will most probably enter next year.

My impression - and this was verified by some professors of mine - is that the comparative politics program is the safest bet if you are considering a Phd down the line in political science. Its curriculum and required classes most closely resemble an equivalent Masters program in PoliSci at an American university. Because it is so grounded in disciplinary learning, it has a much more focused curriculum.

Also, I think that you would get a better regional focus if you applied for the Comparative politics program. the IR curriculum seems very broad/global/transnational, but the comparative politics and global politics programs offer courses in strict regional contexts

Reply 13

OP

Poliwog - I agree. It does appear to me that comparative politics is the 'classical' pol sci program at the LSE but it also appears the comparative politics course has the least flexibility.

In some ways, the focus on inter-state relationships in the IR courses makes it a little out of date (e.g. where does transnational crime or health issues fit in?).

That leaves global politics which seems incredibly flexible. The problem with global politics is perhaps a lack of awareness in the jobs market about what the course involves. Although given the early 'closed' status of the course, global politics seems to have increased its profile.

Reply 14

16

oregon

Poliwog - I agree. It does appear to me that comparative politics is the 'classical' pol sci program at the LSE but it also appears the comparative politics course has the least flexibility.

In some ways, the focus on inter-state relationships in the IR courses makes it a little out of date (e.g. where does transnational crime or health issues fit in?).

That leaves global politics which seems incredibly flexible. The problem with global politics is perhaps a lack of awareness in the jobs market about what the course involves. Although given the early 'closed' status of the course, global politics seems to have increased its profile.

It closed in March last year.

To me, Global Politics is where IR should be heading. My BA in IR was much more similar to GP than it is to LSE's IR course--which is why I didn't apply to it.

I agree that there is lack of awareness in the job market. I tend to say "it's the study of globalization" when people ask for further details. However I remedied this by placing my modules at the top of my CV, which explain my area of focus.

Reply 15

OP

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced a course about globalisation is much more useful than a classical IR course - especially if you want to end up in the private sector.

Reply 16

Perhaps not surprisingly, I'm inclined to disagree with the last couple statements. While LSE is obviously world-renowned, the IR and economics programs tend to be the best known of the programs there. There is an element of additional prestige there, which seems to only matter when applying for a Ph.D.

More importantly, though, Oregon's last post probably isn't as accurate as it could be. If you want to end up in the private sector, you should probably do Politics of the World Economy. Heavily trade focused, and it falls under the IR department. GP is probably good for development-oriented careers, but then that is complicated by the presence of the development programs and some of the IR department's offerings.

But straight IR is excellent, especially if you want to go into the government. Remember, many of the organizations, governments, and businesses out there still run things off of a state-based model, and there are good reasons for it.

In the end, though, these are simply shades of difference. The LSE name is usually more than enough to carry you through job applications, even if the program isn't exactly clear for its title. And my impression of these programs is colored by where my friends in each of them ended up, so you may want to take that into consideration.

Reply 17

16

Chengora

Perhaps not surprisingly, I'm inclined to disagree with the last couple statements. While LSE is obviously world-renowned, the IR and economics programs tend to be the best known of the programs there. There is an element of additional prestige there, which seems to only matter when applying for a Ph.D.

More importantly, though, Oregon's last post probably isn't as accurate as it could be. If you want to end up in the private sector, you should probably do Politics of the World Economy. Heavily trade focused, and it falls under the IR department. GP is probably good for development-oriented careers, but then that is complicated by the presence of the development programs and some of the IR department's offerings.

But straight IR is excellent, especially if you want to go into the government. Remember, many of the organizations, governments, and businesses out there still run things off of a state-based model, and there are good reasons for it.

In the end, though, these are simply shades of difference. The LSE name is usually more than enough to carry you through job applications, even if the program isn't exactly clear for its title. And my impression of these programs is colored by where my friends in each of them ended up, so you may want to take that into consideration.

Just for the record, Politics of the World Economy is now called International Political Economy. And I have loads of friends in that course--it's pretty pro-neoliberalism. If that's not your flavor, it's not the right program for you. You can do GP, basically take the same classes, but through the core course come out with a very different conclusion.

And I have a degree in IR already, I still think GP is much more reality-based than IR. A number of my friends in the IR program have been disappointed with the heavy emphasis on theory. Another factor: there are very few PhD programs in IR, and for most of the students on that MSC course, they view the degree as their academic end-point.

Reply 18

Interesting. Again, though, I'm inclined to disagree. The IR program is certainly more theory-based, if only because of the core course. But, incidentally, that doesn't mean that it's less reality-based, as I have found the theories to be quite useful in my work after LSE. Even during it, it was much easier to frame debates and write the exams through the theoretical perspectives, and many friends in courses like history of IR and comparative asked for my materials on the theory for that reason. It is, after all, the stuff that tends to stick with you and change relatively less as time goes on.

Of course, it all depends on what you're looking for and what mix of degrees/experience you have. And naturally, where you're going. And in that, I would say there are some problems in the points people have made. When I said that GP is more development based and IR more government based, it's because those bodies tend to reflect different views of international relations. On balance, development NGOs tend to look at transnational issues more, although most still run things through state-based systems (funding mechanisms, M&E, etc.). Similarly, governments rather naturally think they're the major players in the game. IPE is merely reflective of major business practices and approaches (my girlfriend is doing her MBA, and I've worked in the private sector before, so I say this with some certainty).

So, it very much depends on where you want to go. I will say, though, that LSE's stellar reputation in IR is certainly deserved, and in part because it was one of the early pioneers the scholar-practitioner/advisor idea. And towards that end, while it's tempting to say that transnational issues are increasingly driving the world, I would caution that in my experience, the state-centered system is still here to stay for a good long time.

Oh, for the Ph.D., I wouldn't consider that a huge issue. A specific Ph.D. in International Relations? Yes, definitely less so. International Relations as a concentration in a politics Ph.D.? It abounds, and the LSE IR degree is looked upon highly. I originally looked at the MSc as the endpoint. Now, I'm applying for Ph.D.s (in the U.S., however), and I'm not concerned (nor are any of the people I have talked to) that the LSE degree is in any way a hindrance.

Reply 19