Suchergebnisse

Recognizing the vital importance of concepts in shaping our understanding of international relations, this ground-breaking new book puts concepts front and centre, systematically unpacking them in a clear, critical and engaging way. With contributions from some of the foremost authorities in the field, Concepts in World Politics explores 17 core concepts, from democracy to globalization, sovereignty to revolution, and covers:. The multiple meanings of a concept, where these meanings come from, and how they are employed theoretically and practically. The consequences of using concepts to frame the world in one way or another. The method of concept analysis A challenging and stimulating read, Concepts in World Politics is an indispensable guide for all students of international relations looking to develop a more nuanced and sophisticated ...

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.

This book engages the view that students of International Relations need to break with the habit of defining power in terms of military capabilities of states. Featuring contributions from both upcoming and distinguished scholars, including Steven Lukes, Joseph Nye, and Stefano Guzzini, it explores the nature and location of 'power' in international politics through a variety of conceptual lenses. With a particular focus on the phenomenon of 'soft' power and different types of actors in a globalizing world, fifteen chapters assess the meaning of 'power' from the perspectives of reali.

Intro -- Contents -- List of Authors -- 1 Introduction: Ideologies in World Politics -- Abstract -- References -- 2 Islam and Ideology in World Politics -- Abstract -- 1 Religion and Ideology in the Muslim World: Context and Taxonomy -- 2 Islam and Politics: Global Reach, Universal Claim -- 3 Confronting Modernity: Recharging the Caliphate and Pan-Islamism -- 4 Ideological Divergence: Conflating and Deconflating Religion and Statehood -- 5 Conclusion: Trajectories for the Twenty-First Century -- References -- 3 Humanitarianism and the Migration Crisis -- Abstract -- 1 Understanding a Complex and 'Inhuman' World -- 2 Theoretical Reflections on the Changing Nature of Security and Crises -- 3 Humanitarianism and Migration: Trends and Dilemma -- 4 Humanitarianism and Migration: Between Tradition and Innovation -- 4.1 Humanitarianism and Migration: Traditional Tasks and Approaches -- 4.2 Humanitarianism and Migration: Innovative (and Controversial) Practices -- 5 The Future of Humanitarianism and the Migration Challenges: Towards a Better World? -- References -- 4 Ideology and International Security -- Abstract -- 1 Epistemology and the Study of Ideology in International Security -- 1.1 The Causal Treatment of Ideology -- 1.2 The Constitutive View of Ideology -- 2 Making It Matter: Neoconservatism and International Security -- 3 Conclusion -- References -- 5 Environmental Ideologies in Global Politics -- Abstract -- 1 Varieties of Environmentalism -- 1.1 Neoliberal Environmentalism -- 1.2 Interventionist Environmentalism -- 1.3 Biocentric Environmentalism -- 1.4 Green Environmentalism -- 2 The Uneven Influence of Environmental Ideologies -- 2.1 Environmental Regimes and Institutions -- 2.2 Global Environmental Governance -- 2.3 Grassroots Mobilisation: Fringe or Future? -- References -- 6 The Ideology of the Global Commons -- Abstract.

Introduction : theorising hierarchies / Ayse Zarakol -- Laws and norms in the making of international hierarchies / David Lake - Making empires : hierarchy, conquest and customization / Andrew Phillips -- Hierarchy and paternalism / Michael Barnett -- Revealing international hierarchy through gender lenses / Laura Sjoberg -- Against authority : the heavy weight of international hierarchy / Vincent Pouliot -- Hierarchy in an age of equality : micro-states and dependencies / J.C. Sharman -- 'Command and control?' : hierarchy in the politics of foreign military bases / Alex Cooley -- Leading authority as hierarchy among INGOs / Sarah Stroup and Wendy Wong -- 'Lazy Greeks' and 'Nazi Germans' : negotiating international hierarchies in the Euro crisis / Rebecca Adler-Nissen -- 'Subcultural groupings' in international system hierarchy : China in Africa / Shogo Suzuki -- Beyond hierarchy / Jack Donnelly -- Why hierarchy? / Ayse Zarakol

The imposition of normalcy on fragile states and crises and its implications for world politics.

World politics has never been a democratic realm. Now, with interdependence and globalization prompting demands for global governance, the lack of global democracy has become an important public issue. Yet the domestic analogy is unhelpful since the conditions for electoral democracy, much less participatory democracy, do not exist on a global level. Rather than abandoning democratic principles, we should rethink our ambitions. First, we should emphasize, in our normative as well as our positive work, the role played by information in facilitating international cooperation and democratic discourse. Second, we should define feasible objectives such as limiting potential abuses of power, rather than aspiring to participatory democracy and then despairing of its impossibility. Third, we should focus as much on the powerful entities that are the core of the problem, including multinational firms and states, as on multilateral organizations, which often are the focus of criticism. Finally, we need to think about how to design a pluralistic accountability system for world politics that relies on a variety of types of accountability: supervisory, fiscal, legal, market, peer and reputational. A challenge for contemporary political science is to design such a system, which could promote both democratic values and effective international cooperation.

As everyone who has taught a course on international politics can readily attest, there are few events which evoke as strong a reaction from students as does a major surprise. Surprise leaves a deep imprint upon the student, generating two simultaneous reactions which push the student in opposite directions. On the one hand, the student is impressed by the range of what can be accomplished by a skillfully undertaken course of action. At least for the moment, world politics no longer appears to him or her as an arena beset by problems totally without solutions. The strongly held desire of most students to believe that insight and vision can solve problems is reaffirmed.Surprise also produced a second reaction. Depending upon whether the event is perceived favorably or not, student reaction ranges from moral outrage, to puzzlement, to disbelief or exhilaration.

Loyalty is part of the glue that holds relationships together in times of difficulty. Surprisingly, however, hardly any literature exists on the role of loyalty in International Relations. The concept is routinely invoked – not least the notion of the 'loyal ally' – but typically only in passing and often based on questionable assumptions about the nature and effect of loyalty. Building on literature in moral philosophy on the ethics of loyalty, this paper presents loyalty as persistently partial behaviour driven by affective attachments. Such attachments are, in turn, driven mainly by a sense of shared social identity but also the interaction between subjects and objects of loyalty. I show how this understanding of loyalty differs from how most political scientists use the concept and illustrate why it matters for the study of world politics.

Racism reflects how we think and act as much as what. It manifests in terms of biology, geography, and culture but reflects an episteme that normalises Self and Other into a bordered binary. Here, a trialectical epistemology can help. It dissolves racialised realities by showing how opposites exist in each other, thereby constituting a three-ness – e.g. self-in-other and other-in-self – that links Self and Other despite mutual antagonisms. From such trialectics, epistemic compassion can arise. It enables learning from the Other through what Buddhists call 'interbeing' or the recognition that 'you are in me, and I in you'. Reciprocity thus becomes key. The Self cannot violate the Other without also violating itself; likewise, loving the Other effectively loves the Self. Flat, monochromatic binaries like 'black' versus 'white' cannot continue and colour revivifies world politics, both literally and figuratively. I apply trialectics to the 'border problem' between India and China as an analogy.

The concept of power derives its meanings and theoretical roles from the theories in which it is embedded. There is hence no one concept of power, no single understanding of power, even if these understandings stand in relation to each other. Besides the usual theoretical traditions common to International Relations and the social sciences, from rationalist to constructivist and post-structuralist approaches, there is, however, also a specificity of power being a concept used in both political theory and political practice. A critical survey of these approaches needs to cast its net wide to see both the differences, but also links across these theoretical divides. Realist understandings of power are heavily impressed by political theory, especially when defining the particular ontology of 'the political'. They are also characterized by their attempt, so far not successful, to translate practical maxims of power into a scientific theory. Liberal and structural power approaches use power as a central factor for understanding outcomes and hierarchies, while generally neglecting any reference to political theory and often overloading the mere concept of power as if it were already a full-fledged theory. Finally, power has also been understood in the constitutive but often tacit processes of social recognition and identity formation, of technologies of government, and of the performativity of power categories when the latter interact with the social world, that is, the power politics that characterize the processes in which we 'make' the social world. Relating back to political practice and theory, these approaches risk repeating a realist fallacy. Whereas it is arguably correct to see power always connected to politics, not all politics is always connected or reducible to power. Seeing power not only as coercive but also productive should neither invite us to reduce all politics to it, nor to turn power into the meta-physical prime-mover of all things political.