Suchergebnisse

Diez, Thomas ; Steans, Jill: A useful dialogue? Habermas and international relations - S. 127-140 Linklater, Andrew: Dialogic politics and the civilising process - S. 141-154 Hutchings, Kimberly: Speaking and hearing: Habermanisian discourse ethics, feminism and IR - S. 155-165 Deitelhoff, Nicole ; Müller, Harald: Theoretical paradise - empirically lost? Arguing with Habermas - S. 167-179 Haacke, Jürgen: The Frankfurt School and international relations: on the centrality of recognition - S. 181-194 Weber, Martin: The critical social theory of the Frankfurt School, and the "social turn" in IR - S. 195-209

Harmony is a generally agreed-upon idea in international and diplomatic discourse. A common theme in multiple traditions of thought, Platonist and Confucian among others, it underlies today's significant investments in musical activism, cultural diplomacy, conflict resolution and peace building. Yet despite this wide currency and long history, the idea of harmony seldom receives more than liminal attention in political theory. In the context of Western thought, an essay written in the 1830s by the French philosopher Jean Reynaud offers a striking point of departure: Reynaud defines diplomacy as 'the science of harmony among states'. This article, drawing from Reynaud's text as well from the wider history of music, art and political thought, maps a series of conceptual fault lines that touch on the concept's function in international thought; the inscription of difference, dissonance, conflict and even war within the idea of harmony; the hegemonic and imperial temptations harmony encompasses and legitimizes; and the theoretical sources of harmony in nature and artifice. In effect, the concept of harmony offers less a blueprint than a forum for imagining peace.

What is the relationship between security and secularization in International Relations? The widespread acceptance of secularism as the paradigmatic framework that underlies the study of world politics has left this question largely unexplored. Yet, the recent challenges to the secularization thesis and the growing attention that is being devoted to questions of religion and secularism in international politics increasingly suggest the importance of undertaking this investigation. This article takes up this task in three main steps. First, it will explore how the limits of a widely accepted but nonetheless problematic account of the emergence of the modern Westphalian nation-state contribute to a dominant underlying assumption in security studies that implicitly associates security with secularization. Second, it will articulate a competing genealogy of security and secularization which suggests that rather than solving the problem of religious insecurity, secularization makes the question of fear and the politics of exceptionalism central to the state-centric project of modernity and its related vision of security. Finally, the article will examine how these elements inform and, most of all, constrain attempts to move beyond the traditional state-centric framework of security. The focus will be on three such attempts: human security, the securitization theory and Ken Booth's critical theory of security. [Reprinted by permission; copyright Sage Publications Ltd. & ECPR-European Consortium for Political Research.]

"International Organizations and Economic Governance" published on by Oxford University Press.