World-state formation: historical processes and emergent necessity

1990 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Chase-Dunn
Keyword(s):  
State Formation ◽  
World State ◽  
Historical Processes

Accelerating democratic global state formation

2012 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Chase-Dunn ◽  
Hiroko Inoue
Keyword(s):  
State Formation ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International System ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Global State ◽  
World State ◽  
Global Democracy ◽  
15Th Century ◽  
Historical Processes

This article discusses the evolution of the international system and global governance within the Europe-centred modern world-system since the 15th century in the context of a comparative framework that includes interpolity systems since the Stone Age. The evolution of the modern system includes the emergence of the European system of sovereign national states and colonial empires, the extension of the Westphalian system to the non-core by succeeding waves of decolonization, the rise and fall of successively larger hegemons, the deepening of global capitalism in waves of globalization, the emergence of weak international regulatory institutions and the prospects for and the rapid emergence of global democracy. It is not claimed that a global state has already emerged, but the authors see the long-term processes as the early stages of the emergence of a world state, and consider how these processes might be accelerated within the next few decades. The need for democratization of the institutions of global governance is also discussed. However, in this article, the focus is more on real geo-historical processes than normative questions, outlining the evolution of interpolity institutional orders, describing the challenges in thinking about global state formation, and discussing some of the technological and political forces that might accelerate the long-term trend toward global state formation.

Dependent state formation and Third World militarization

1993 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 321-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Wendt ◽  
Michael Barnett
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
State Formation ◽  
Third World ◽  
Security Studies ◽  
Security Threats ◽  
The West ◽  
Internal Security ◽  
World State ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Dependent State

The relationship between militarization and state formation in the West has been the subject of considerable scholarship,1 and there is thus some temptation to simply transfer concepts and arguments from that domain to the study of Third World militarization. Yet state formation dynamics in the two contexts were and are quite different, with important implications for the nature of national security threats. In the West threats tended to be external, rooted in anarchical competition between relatively equal states possessing domestic legitimacy, which meant that militarization could be understood primarily in terms of the political realist focus on security dilemmas and action-reaction dynamics. In contrast, Third World state formation has occurred in a largely dependent context in which relative external security contrasts with domestic insecurity.2 In this case the external environment, rather than being a source of threat, becomes a source of opportunities for elites lacking domestic legitimacy to gain support against internal security threats. In short, national security problems look very different in the First and Third Worlds because of different trajectories and contexts of state formation. Very different mechanisms may therefore account for militarization, suggesting the need for concepts and theories different than those that dominate security studies in the West.

scholarly journals UKRAINIAN REVOLUTION AND STATE FORMATION: ON ISSUE OF THE PERIODIZATION AND CHRONOLOGY OF NATIONAL LIBERATION STRUGGLE OF THE EARLY 20th CENTURY

2018 ◽  
pp. 4-12
Author(s):  
Pavlo Hai-Nyzhnyk
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
State Formation ◽  
Political History ◽  
National Liberation ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
Chronological Period ◽  
History Of ◽  
Liberation Struggle ◽  
The Times

The controversial issue of periodization of the political history of Ukraine at the beginning of the 20th century, including the period of the National liberation struggle and Ukrainian State entities during 1917–1922 is considered. Scientists and experts have not yet reached a consensus not only on determining the place, role and character of the Hetmanate in 1918 in the latest Ukrainian past, but also about the periodization of the Ukrainian political history of the 20th century, defi nition of the term and chronological boundaries of the Ukrainian Revolution and Ukrainian statehood, etc. The issute of the periodization of the National liberation struggle of the Ukrainian people from the beginning of the 20th century, the aspiration and purpose of which was to gain and assert its own statehood, had several main schemes, models and periodizations in the national historiography. However, disputes over defi nitions not only of the chronological framework of this historical path, but also of the interpretations and characteristics of its individual days, periods, and stages are still ongoing in the scientifi c community. It is up to me, that the times from 1917 to 1922 should be defi ned as one of the days of the Ukrainian political history of the 20th century, namely: The Day “National Liberation Struggle and Ukrainian State Formation (1917–1922 biennium)”. This title was due to historical processes and components, that took place in the specifi ed chronological period, the logic of interrelated events, factors and circumstances, objective signs of fl uidity, similarity and diversity of periods, the identity of the causal eff ects of both internal and external circumstances and infl uences, interconnectedness of cultural, social, ideological and political, and state-evolutionary factors of nation-wide signifi cance, the regularity of the beginning and end of the national-political breakdown, holding otvorchyh eff orts and organized struggle for their own rights to self-determination of Nation-Ukrainian people. It is the author’s conception of the periodization of this era, that would be discussed in this essay

scholarly journals Constructivism in International Relations: from a theory between positivism and postpositivism to the theory of the world state

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Anwar Mohamed Faraj ◽  
Tara Taha Othman
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Theoretical Study ◽  
Cultural Factors ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
World State ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
Methodological Problems ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War

Constructivism emerged at the end of the Cold War and entered into IR theories debate by criticizing the rationalists (neo-liberal and neo-realist) on the one hand and critics on the other, accusing them of failing to predict and explain the end of the Cold War. While rationalists focus on material and economic factors, constructivists focus on cultural factors, the influence of ideas, norms and identities on the explanation of processes of interest formation, how to define survival and defining mechanisms of international politics, and emphasize that interest and identity interact through socio-historical processes and constitute each other. Thus, constructivism belongs to the fourth debate in the theoretical study of International Relations and it is one of the post-positivist theories, but it attempts to serve as a bridge between the positivist and post-positivist approaches. For example, if post-positivist theories are criticized, because of suffering from providing a realistic alternative versus of the description and explanation offered by rational theories, constructivism tries to overcome this criticism and it is able to provide the research program required to remove the post-positivist dilemma, by providing the practical hypotheses required by the establishment of a theory to describe and explain the reality of international relations. However, constructivism is not immune from criticism, it is accused that it does not offer anything new and exaggerates the understanding of cultural factors such as norms and identities and their impact on the reality of international relations, as well as its epistemological and methodological problems and its internal divisions between modern constructivists and postmodern constructivists.

scholarly journals Race, Culture and Political Exclusion/Inclusion: The Cases of Australia and New Zealand

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 890-897
Author(s):  
Sukari Ivester
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
State Formation ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Political Discourses ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
Racial Conflicts ◽  
Political Exclusion

This article presents a comparison between Australia and New Zealand and the extent to which exclusionary and incorporationist dynamics became dominant in the material practices and political discourses that governed the ethno-racial conflicts in each society. It is argued that formative historical processes led to an overall stronger exclusionary trend in Australia, expressed in the formation of two distinct societies, as compared to a stronger incorporationist trend in New Zealand, expressed in the formation of one internally differentiated and highly inegalitarian society. The task of this historical analysis is to explain why this turned out to be the case. It is argued that two analytical factors account for the divergent courses taken by the two societies in question: (1) the differing capacities of the indigenous people to respond to and shape the process of group encounter and conflict; and (2) the strategies adopted by settler and colonial forces in pursuit of their interests. These analytical factors provide a framework for ultimately discussing the historical processes of state formation in both Australian and New Zealand societies.

War, State Formation, and Culture

2013 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 795-797 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Neep
Keyword(s):  
State Formation ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
First Generation ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Historical Sociology ◽  
State Violence ◽  
Early States ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
Medieval Europe ◽  
War Effort

Historical sociology has long been concerned with the study of organized state violence. Since the mid-1970s, a substantial body of work has come to focus on the importance of warfare to historical processes of state formation. The first generation of this literature proposed that the relentless existential struggle between the warring polities of medieval Europe had favored the survival of states that could adopt ever more efficient means to extract and mobilize resources from the local population to feed the war effort. Early states therefore evolved the institutions to collect taxes and administer territory largely as a functional byproduct of interstate military competition. From this perspective, the logic of war making was the driving force behind the rise of the modern state in Europe.

scholarly journals Beyond Liberal Peace in Sri Lanka: Victory, Politics, and State Formation

2020 ◽  
pp. 154231662097612
Author(s):  
Malin Åkebo ◽  
Sunil Bastian
Keyword(s):  
Sri Lanka ◽  
State Formation ◽  
Sri Lankan ◽  
State Reform ◽  
Communal Violence ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
The Government ◽  
Post War ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Military Victory

In 2009, the war between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam ended through a military victory for the government. Features of the post-war peace—including persistent militarization, strengthened nationalism, and communal violence—have commonly been attributed to a failed attempt at liberal peacebuilding followed by an authoritarian backlash. In contrast, this study shows how the post-war peace has been shaped by historical processes of state formation aimed at consolidating the Sri Lankan state. The article takes a long-term approach to analysing peace in Sri Lanka through the lens of state formation. The analysis centres on four key aspects: (1) post-war security, (2) state–minority relations, (3) socio-economic aspects, and (4) electoral politics. We conclude that there are currently few signs of any substantial state reform that would accommodate the continuous demand for social justice and minority rights that has spurred violent conflicts in Sri Lanka.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document