Search results

▪ Abstract  Constructivism is an approach to social analysis that deals with the role of human consciousness in social life. It asserts that human interaction is shaped primarily by ideational factors, not simply material ones; that the most important ideational factors are widely shared or "intersubjective" beliefs, which are not reducible to individuals; and that these shared beliefs construct the interests of purposive actors. In international relations, research in a constructivist mode has exploded over the past decade, creating new and potentially fruitful connections with long-standing interest in these issues in comparative politics. In this essay, we evaluate the empirical research program of constructivism in these two fields. We first lay out the basic tenets of constructivism and examine their implications for research methodology, concluding that constructivism's distinctiveness lies in its theoretical arguments, not in its empirical research strategies. The bulk of the essay explores specific constructivist literatures and debates in international relations and comparative politics.

Normen haben beim Studium der internationalen Politik immer eine Rolle gespielt, aber erst seit den 80er Jahren sind sie als zentraler theoretischer Ansatz wieder in den Blickpunkt gerückt. Normen schaffen soziale Strukturen und bringen Stabilität in die internationale Politik. Neue Forschungen über Normen haben zudem ihre Rolle im Herbeiführen von politischem Wandel erkannt und damit dem Einfluß von Normen wieder wichtige Bedeutung zugemessen (SWP-Drh)

Norms have never been absent from the study of international politics, but the sweeping "ideational turn" in the 1980s and 1990s brought them back as a central theoretical concern in the field. Much theorizing about norms has focused on how they create social structure, standards of appropriateness, and stability in international politics. Recent empirical research on norms, in contrast, has examined their role in creating political change, but change processes have been less well-theorized. We induce from this research a variety of theoretical arguments and testable hypotheses about the role of norms in political change. We argue that norms evolve in a three-stage "life cycle" of emergence, "norm cascades," and internalization, and that each stage is governed by different motives, mechanisms, and behavioral logics. We also highlight the rational and strategic nature of many social construction processes and argue that theoretical progress will only be made by placing attention on the connections between norms and rationality rather than by opposing the two.

In Show Time, Lee Ann Fujii asks why some perpetrators of political violence, from lynch mobs to genocidal killers, display their acts of violence so publicly and extravagantly. Closely examining three horrific and extreme episodes - the murder of a prominent Tutsi family amidst the genocide in Rwanda, the execution of Muslim men in a Serb-controlled village in Bosnia during the Balkan Wars, and the lynching of a twenty-two-year old Black farmhand on Maryland's Eastern Shore in 1933 - Fujii shows how "violent displays" are staged to not merely to kill those perceived to be enemies or threats, but also to affect and influence observers, neighbors, and the larger society. Watching and participating in these violent displays profoundly transforms those involved, reinforcing political identities, social hierarchies, and power structures. Such public spectacles of violence also force members of the community to choose sides - openly show support for the goals of the violence, or risk becoming victims, themselves. Tracing the ways in which public displays of violence unfold, Show Time reveals how the perpetrators exploit the fluidity of social ties for their own ends.

Abstract
Accusations of bad state behaviour in cyberspace are proliferating, yet this increase in naming has not obviously produced much shame. Accused states uniformly deny the accusation or decline to comment, without changing behaviour. For international lawyers, the problem is compounded by the absence of international law in these charges. States are not invoking international law when they complain of other states' behaviour, suggesting the law is weak – or worse, irrelevant – in holding states accountable for their cyber operations. In lieu of 'naming and shaming', we introduce and examine the broader concept of 'accusation' as a social, political and legal practice with diverse uses in cyberspace and beyond. Accusers must make strategic choices about how they frame their accusations, and we unpack various elements accusers may manipulate to their advantage. Accusations also have many purposes. They may seek to 'name and shame' an accused into conforming to certain behavioural expectations, but they may also aim at defensive or deterrent effects on both the accused and, crucially, on third parties. Particularly important, accusations may play a constitutive role, constructing new norms, including customary international law, within the international community. In short, accusations offer states and other stakeholders a menu of strategic options beyond those identified by the extant literature on naming and shaming.