Suchergebnisse

Many philosophers now reject the conception of philosophy & of the resulting connexion between philosophy & pol, on which most of classical pol'al philosophy rests. If the philosophical, sociol'al & ideological impulses of pol'al theory have grown weaker in recent yrs, this ought to mean - at least as far as the ideological impulse is concerned - that questions of pol'al org, of allocation of pol'al rights & powers, etc, are not at present felt to be morally critical. The argument against `ideological pol' has taken a number of lines, one of which is that ideologically-dominated thinking has no relevance to the controlling facts of contemporary soc structure & change. It follows that much recent British & American pol'al theory has been concerned with the devaluation of ideology & ideologies, with showing the importance of `technique' as opposed to ideology, or with showing that 'incrementalism' (Dahl & Lindblom) or `piecemeal engineering' (Popper) are the most rational methods of pol'al change. J. Schumpeter, in his CAPITALISM, SOCIALISM AND DEMOCRACY, & R. A. Dahl, in PREFACE TO DEMOCRATIC THEORY, follow the same anti-ideological trend. Their example shows that it is absurd to say that the energy or the rigor of pol'al theorizing have declined; on the contrary, it has acquired an analytical thoroughness & sharpness, a closeness in argument, that is pretty new. It does show, however, a narrowing of moral interests & expectations, a dismissal of wider notions of equality, freedom, participation, & a tendency to be most interested in the existing machinery of democratic systems, which proceed from a sci'fic & critical approach of the problem. IPSA.

Heterarchy in World Politics challenges the fundamental framing of international relations and world politics. IR theory has always been dominated by the presumption that world politics is, at its core, a system of states. However, this has always been problematic, challengeable, time-bound, and increasingly anachronistic. In the 21st century, world politics is becoming increasingly multi-nodal and characterized by "heterarchy" - the coexistence and conflict between differently structured micro- and meso quasi-hierarchies that compete and overlap not only across borders but also across economic-financial sectors and social groupings. Thinking about international order in terms of heterarchy is a paradigm shift away from the mainstream "competing paradigms" of realism, liberalism, and constructivism. This book explores how, since the mid-20th century, the dialectic of globalization and fragmentation has caught states and the interstate system in the complex evolutionary process toward heterarchy. These heterarchical institutions and processes are characterized by increasing autonomy and special interest capture. The process of heterarchy empowers strategically situated agents - especially agents with substantial autonomous resources, and in particular economic resources - in multi-nodal competing institutions with overlapping jurisdictions. The result is the decreasing capacity of macro-states to control both domestic and transnational political/economic processes. In this book, the authors demonstrate that this is not a simple breakdown of states and the states system; it is in fact the early stages of a structural evolution of world politics.