My research lies at the intersection of democratic theory and intellectual history, with a particular focus on the Italian tradition and the formation of the social science disciplines.
I am currently working on two book projects and a few article manuscripts.
Monographs in Progress
Democratic Elitism: The Secret History of American Political Science
This manuscript reevaluates the Italian School of Elitism, tracing how the normative and methodological contributions of its key figures — Mosca, Pareto, and Michels — were transformed by Anglo-American political science in the post-war period. This revisionist history demonstrates that Mosca, Pareto and Michels were the exact opposite of what Anglo-American political science portrayed them to be: not champions of electoral democracy for permitting elite domination of the people to persist; but rather severe critics of electoral government precisely because it fostered elite dominance of the people through plutocratic capture of democratic institutions.
By exposing the distorted Anglo-American reception of Italian theory in the history of postwar political science, the project impels us to cease narrowly equating modern democracy with fair and free elections. This “minimalist” conception, I argue, leaves democracy continually vulnerable to plutocratic domination of the very demos that it is supposed to protect—just as Mosca, Pareto, and Michels predicted.
Schumpeter’s Challenge: A Critical Reading of Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy
My second book project, Schumpeter’s Challenge: A Critical Reading of Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, analyzes the political and economic features of capitalist development through a close reading of Joseph Schumpeter’s writings. The project prompts a reconsideration of whether “neoliberal,” “Schumpeterian” views of entrepreneurship, monopoly capitalism, and creative destruction ought to be attributed to him, as they so often are. Quite simply, I contend that “Schumpeterianism” does not accurately reflect what Schumpeter actually said about any of these phenomena. What Schumpeter did have to say, I argue, drastically revises our paradigm of what ought to constitute both political leadership and citizenship in contemporary representative government.
Manuscripts in Progress
“Schumpeter Against Realism”: The Utopia of Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy”
Revise & Resubmit
“Guicciardini’s Republicanism: Uomini Da Bene vs. Uomini Savi” in the Dialogo
Book chapter for edited volume
“Two Responses to a Walrasian Regulative Ideal: Pareto and Schumpeter”
In preparation for journal submission
“Rethinking Liberal Democracy: Elites and Representation in the Pandemic Era"
Book chapter for edited volume