Postmodernism, ethics and international political theory

1995 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 237-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly Cochran
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Political Practice ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
International Theory ◽  
International Political Theory

A group of writers have taken up Nietzsche's hammer against the constructions of contemporary international theory. Postmodern approaches problematize the dominant understanding of international relations as a world of sovereign states which demarcate inside from outside, order from anarchy, identity from difference. More generally, they challenge the notion of sovereignty as an ahistorical, universal, transcendent concept, be it applied to the sovereign state, the sovereign individual or a sovereign truth. Sovereignty and the dichotomies regulated by its power are mechanisms of domination and closure which limit the play of political practice. It is the aim of these writers to hammer away at these limitations, opening space for plural and diverse practices in world politics.

Why Is There No International Theory?

2021 ◽  
pp. 22-38
Author(s):  
Martin Wight
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Historical Interpretation ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Perpetual Peace ◽  
International Theory ◽  
Raison D’État ◽  
The Rich

In this essay Wight explained why there is no set of classic works regarding relations among states—what Wight terms ‘international theory’— analogous to the rich political theory literature concerning the state. In addition to works on international law, four categories of effort have populated the field: (a) those of ‘irenists’ advocating mechanisms to promote peace; (b) those of Machiavellians examining raison d’état; (c) incidental works by great philosophers and historians; and (d) noteworthy speeches and other writings by statesmen and officials. International theory works have been ‘marked, not only by paucity but also by intellectual and moral poverty’, because of the focus since the sixteenth century on the modern sovereign state, with the states-system neglected. Moreover, while there has been material and organizational progress within states in recent centuries, international relations have remained ‘incompatible with progressivist theory’. People who recoil from analyses implying that progress in international affairs is doubtful sometimes prefer a Kantian ‘argument from desperation’ asserting the feasibility of improvements and ‘perpetual peace’. Wight concluded that ‘historical interpretation’ is for international relations the counterpart of political theory for the state.

Pluralism in international political theory

1992 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert H. Jackson
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
International Society ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
International Theory ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
Basic Distinction ◽  
Hedley Bull ◽  
Better Than

Martin Wight once claimed there was no international political theory worthy of the name. In this I believe he was mistaken. But he also maintained, as Benedict Kingsbury and Adam Roberts put it, that ‘the most fundamental question you can ask in international theory is, What is international society? Hedley Bull likewise drew a basic distinction, as several contributors to the volume edited by J. D. B. Miller and the late R. J. Vincent remind us, between the system of states and the society of states. Each of these volumes takes up Wight's question and explores Bull's distinction in various ways, most of them engaging and enlightening. For an overview of the main approaches and controversies in the study of normative international relations today one could scarcely do better than consult them.

scholarly journals Aesthetic and World Politics by Roland Bleiker. Basingtoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Hardcover: 271 pp.

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Siti Aliyuna Pratisti ◽  
Junita Budi Rachman
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Great Role ◽  
Political Theories ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
The World ◽  
The Aesthetic

Aesthetic approach to politics is not really something considered as a novelty. Immanuel Kant has described the aesthetic relationship with rationality way back in the 17th century, as well as Friedrich Nietzsche and Jaques Rancier as a more contemporary counterpart. In the field of international relations, the study of aesthetics has been raised by a number of reviewers – from James Der Derian, Costas Constantinou, David Campbell, to Anthony Burke – who began to lay aesthetics as a foothold in approaching various phenomena. Roland Bleiker is one of the most consistent among them. In an essay entitled "The Aesthetic Turn in International Political Theory", Bleiker opened the discourse to establish aesthetics as one of the paradigms in international political theory. His essay is published in 2001, contrasts with the majority of international political theories that always try to "catch the world as it is". Bleiker assumes that there is always a distance between representation and what it represents. Through aesthetics, he criticizes approaches that fill this theoretical gap with mimetic ideas. He emphasizes that aesthetic studies do not try to mimic the reality, but it is trying to recognize the various emotions and sensibilities in the formation of a certain representation. The great role of "emotion" in politics is further explained by Bleiker through an essay entitled “Fear No More: Emotions and World Politics”, published seven years after.

International Political Theory and the Real World

2018 ◽  
pp. 2-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Brown ◽  
Robyn Eckersley
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Critical Theory ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Real World ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Ideal Theory ◽  
The Real ◽  
International Political Theory

This chapter introduces and defends the themes around which the Handbook has been constructed: the importance of an engagement between International Political Theory (IPT) and “real-world” politics, and the need to establish links between IPT and the empirical findings of International Relations scholars. The “new realist” critique of “moralism” is examined along with the more general critique of ideal theory, and both are found to hit a very narrow target. The conventional distinction between “critical theory” and “problem-solving theory” is also challenged, and each is defended as an equally important, albeit different, stage in the life of a theory. The second half of this chapter sets out the principles upon which the Handbook is organized, and provides a guide to each section and chapter.

Minority Rights

2018 ◽  
pp. 165-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will Kymlicka
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
International Order ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Level ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
Rights Issues

It has often been noted that the political claims of minorities and indigenous peoples are marginalized within traditional state-centric international political theory; but perhaps more surprisingly, they are also marginalized within much contemporary cosmopolitan political theory. In this chapter, I will argue that neither cosmopolitanism nor statism as currently theorized is well equipped to evaluate the normative claims at stake in many minority rights issues. I begin by discussing how the “minority question” arose as an issue within international relations—that is, why minorities have been seen as a problem and a threat to international order—and how international actors have historically attempted to contain the problem, often in ways that were deeply unjust to minorities. I will then consider recent efforts to advance a pro-minority agenda at the international level, and how this agenda helps reveal some of the limits of both cosmopolitan and statist approaches to IPT.

scholarly journals Regional order and peaceful change: Security communities as a via media in international relations theory

2014 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Koschut
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Middle Ground ◽  
Security Community ◽  
Intellectual Heritage ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
Regional Order ◽  
Community Concept

The security community concept generally inhabits a rather small niche in the study of International Relations, as the logic of community fundamentally challenges the prevailing logic of anarchy. In this article, it is argued both on ontological and theoretical grounds that the concept’s intellectual heritage and depth transcends the boundaries of existing theories. In this sense, the concept of security community serves as a via media by linking different strands of International Relations theory together and by bridging various theoretical gaps. This argument will be developed in two steps. Firstly, it will be shown that the security community framework developed by Karl W Deutsch is deeply rooted in International Political Theory without belonging to one particular branch. By locating the concept in International Political Theory, an exercise that has been neglected by the security community literature; it will be secondly demonstrated that the concept of security community takes the middle ground between specific strands of International Relations theory, as these strands are ultimately based on concepts of moral philosophy.

Symposium ‘The politics of international recognition’

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Agné ◽  
Jens Bartelson ◽  
Eva Erman ◽  
Thomas Lindemann ◽  
Benjamin Herborth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Political Practice ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
International Recognition ◽  
International Theory ◽  
Social Theories ◽  
New States ◽  
Maximal Relevance

Recognition plays a multifaceted role in international theory. In rarely communicating literatures, the term is invoked to explain creation of new states and international structures; policy choices by state and non-state actors; and normative justifiability, or lack thereof, of foreign and international politics. The purpose of this symposium is to open new possibilities for imagining and studying recognition in international politics by drawing together different strands of research in this area. More specifically, the forum brings new attention to controversies on the creation of states, which has traditionally been a preserve for discussion in International Law, by invoking social theories of recognition that have developed as part of International Relations more recently. It is suggested that broadening imagination across legal and social approaches to recognition provides the resources needed for theories with this object to be of maximal relevance to political practice.

International Theory Book Symposium on Peter J. Katzenstein and Lucia A. Seybert, eds, Protean Power: Exploring the Uncertain and Unexpected in World Politics

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 408-409
Author(s):  
Jacques E. C. Hymans
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Ir Theory ◽  
Control Power ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
International Theory ◽  
The World ◽  
The Future ◽  
Fresh Perspective ◽  
Book Symposium

AbstractKatzenstein and Seybert's Protean Power offers a fresh perspective on the concept of power in international relations (IR) theory. Standard IR theory defines power as control power, which exists in the world of calculable risk. But IR must also grapple with protean power, which exists in the world of incalculable uncertainty. In this symposium, scholars representing a variety of theoretical perspectives evaluate the concept of protean power as it stands now and as it should develop in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document