scholarly journals The secularism of post-secularity: religion, realism, and the revival of grand theory in IR

2012 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 995-1017 ◽  
Author(s):  
ADRIAN PABST
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
English School ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Political Realism ◽  
Grand Theory ◽  
Christian Realism ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Square ◽  
International Theory ◽  
William Connolly

AbstractHow to theorise religion in International Relations (IR)? Does the concept of post-secularity advance the debate on religion beyond the ‘return of religion’ and the crisis of secular reason? This article argues that the post-secular remains trapped in the logic of secularism. First, a new account is provided of the ‘secularist bias’ that characterises mainstream IR theory: (a) defining religion in either essentialist or epiphenomenal terms; (b) positing a series of ‘antagonistic binary opposites’ such as the secularversusthe religious; and (c) de-sacralising and re-sacralising the public square. The article then analyses post-secularity, showing that it subordinates faith under secular reason and sacralises the ‘other’ by elevating difference into the sole transcendental term. Theorists of the post-secular such as Jürgen Habermas or William Connolly also equate secular modernity with metaphysical universalism, which they seek to replace with post-metaphysical pluralism. In contrast, the alternative that this article outlines is an international theory that develops the Christian realism of the English School in the direction of a metaphysical-political realism. Such a realism binds together reason with faith and envisions a ‘corporate’ association of peoples and nations beyond the secularist settlement of Westphalia that is centred on national states and transnational markets. By linking immanent values to transcendent principles, this approach can rethink religion in international affairs and help revive grand theory in IR.

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.

Introduction: Diversity and Disciplinarity in International Relations Theory

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Steve Smith
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Structural Realism ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
English School ◽  
International Theory ◽  
The World

This text argues that theory is central to explaining International Relations (IR) and that the discipline of IR is much more relevant to the world of international relations than it has been at any point in its history. Some chapters cover distinct IR theories ranging from realism/structural realism to liberalism/neoliberalism, the English school, constructivism, Marxism, critical theory, feminism, poststructuralism, green theory, and postcolonialism. Oher chapters explore International Relations theory and its relationship to social science, normative theory, globalization, and the discipline’s identity. This introduction explains why this edition has chosen to cover these theories, reflects on international theory and its relationship to the world, and considers the kind of assumptions about theory that underlie each of the approaches.

III. Peacemaking, Old And New

1923 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-60
Author(s):  
Ernest Satow
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
World War ◽  
German Government ◽  
The Public ◽  
Victorian Period ◽  
The World ◽  
British Institute

Anotion seems to be gaining currency that the methods of diplomacy as now pursued differ in some way from those of what may be called the Victorian period. It has perhaps arisen from the first of President Wilson's Fourteen Points of January 8, 1918, as constituting the only possible programme for giving peace to the world, set forth in these words: “Open covenants of peace openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international undertakings of any kind, but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.” The Fourteen Points were accepted by both Germany and the Allies and Associated Powers of the Entente as “the necessary terms of such an armistice as would fully protect the interest of the peoples involved and ensure to the associated Governments the unrestricted power to safeguard and enforce the details of the peace to which the German Government had agreed”. And it has been rather hastily assumed that this agreement had put an end to the secret diplomacy which hitherto had distorted the policy of the European Allies. A paper read by Sir Maurice Hankey before the British Institute of International Affairs on November 2, 1920, confirmed the view that diplomacy by conference between the principal Ministers of the Powers concerned has to an important extent superseded the old way of conducting international relations through professional diplomatists accredited by the governments concerned, and that this change was brought about by the World War.

International Relations Theory

2021 ◽  
pp. 560-578
Author(s):  
Richard J. Hoskins
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
The Other ◽  
English School ◽  
Ethical Judgement ◽  
Reinhold Niebuhr ◽  
Christian Realism ◽  
A Value ◽  
Hans Morgenthau

The study of international relations is dominated by the school of Realism, articulated in its classical form by Hans Morgenthau. It teaches that great powers are focused on enhancing their national interest defined in terms of power: military, political, and economic. Reinhold Niebuhr became known as the father of Christian Realism, adding his own biblical and Augustinian insights about human nature and its effects on the evil uses of power. Traditionally, both forms of Realism incorporated ethical judgement within their analysis. After Niebuhr’s death, Realism became neorealism, a value-free social science which eschews ethical judgement as any part of international relations study, as did the other major schools—except for the English School. This chapter argues that the English School represents the modern paradigm closest to Niebuhr’s perspective.

International relations, philosophy of

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles R. Beitz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Political Realism ◽  
Special Privilege ◽  
Internal Affairs ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
International Morality ◽  
Intermediate Views

The philosophy of international relations – or more precisely its political philosophy – embraces problems about morality in diplomacy and war, the justice of international practices and institutions bearing on economic welfare and the global environment, human rights, and the relationship between sectional loyalties such as patriotism and global moral commitments. Not everyone believes that such a subject can exist, or rather, that it can have significant ethical content. According to political realism – a widely-held view among Anglo-American students of international relations – moral considerations have no place in decisions about foreign affairs and international behaviour. The most extreme varieties of realism deny that moral judgment can have meaning or force in international affairs; more moderate versions acknowledge the meaningfulness of such judgments but hold either that leaders have no responsibility to attend to the morality of their actions in foreign affairs (because their overriding responsibility is to advance the interests of their constituents), or that the direct pursuit of moral goals in international relations is likely to be self-defeating. Leaving aside the more sceptical kinds of political realism, the most influential orientations to substantive international morality can be arrayed on a continuum. Distinctions are made on the basis of the degree of privilege, if any, extended to the citizens of a state to act on their own behalf at the potential expense of the liberty and wellbeing of persons elsewhere. ‘The morality of states’, at one extreme, holds that states have rights of autonomy analogous to those of individuals within domestic society, which secure them against external interference in their internal affairs and guarantee their ownership and control of the natural and human resources within their borders. At the other end of the continuum, one finds cosmopolitan views which deny that states enjoy any special privilege; these views hold that individuals rather than states are the ultimate subjects of morality, and that value judgments concerning international conduct should take equally seriously the wellbeing of each person potentially affected by a decision, whether compatriot or foreigner. Cosmopolitan views may acknowledge that states (and similar entities) have morally significant features, but analysis of the significance of these features must connect them with considerations of individual wellbeing. Intermediate views are possible; for example, a conception of the privileged character of the state can be combined with a conception of the international realm as weakly normative (that is, governed by principles which demand that states adhere to minimum conditions of peaceful coexistence). The theoretical difference between the morality of states and a fully cosmopolitan morality is reflected in practical differences about the justifiability of intervention in the internal affairs of other states, the basis and content of human rights, and the extent, if any, of our obligations as individuals and as citizens of states to help redress the welfare effects of international inequalities.

International Theory: The Case for a Classical Approach

1966 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hedley Bull
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Classical Approach ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
The Past ◽  
International Theory

Two approaches to the theory of international relations at present compete for our attention. The first of these I shall call the classical approach. By this I do not mean the study and criticism of the “classics” of international relations, the writings of Hobbes, Grotius, Kant, and other great thinkers of the past who have turned their attention to international affairs. Such study does indeed exemplify the classical approach, and it provides a method that is particularly fruitful and important. What I have in mind, however, is something much wider than this: the approach to theorizing that derives from philosophy, history, and law, and that is characterized above all by explicit reliance upon the exercise of judgment and by the assumptions that if we confine ourselves to strict standards of verification and proof there is very little of significance that can be said about international relations, that general propositions about this subject must therefore derive from a scientifically imperfect process of perception or intuition, and that these general propositions cannot be accorded anything more than the tentative and inconclusive status appropriate to their doubtful origin.

Conclusion

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia Bashevkin
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
National Security ◽  
Women Leaders ◽  
Political Representation ◽  
American Woman ◽  
The United States ◽  
Diplomatic History ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Personal Traits ◽  
The Public

Chapter 7 addresses the ways in which women leaders have made a difference in international relations. It considers the main findings from previous chapters in light of themes from feminist diplomatic history, including the changing status of diplomatic as contrasted with military institutions in the United States. The discussion considers what personal traits assisted each leader and compares how Kirkpatrick, Albright, Rice, and Clinton dealt with matters of national security and feminism. It returns to concepts of political representation in order to juxtapose leaders’ track records with the predilections of Americans generally. The chapter speculates as to what can be expected on the terrain of international affairs from an American woman who becomes US president—whether she is already operating in the public limelight or is someone as yet unknown.

Escape From Machiavellianism? Thomist Themes in Twentieth Century Political Realism

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 526-549
Author(s):  
Daniel Edward Young
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
English School ◽  
Political Realism ◽  
Jacques Maritain ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Western Values ◽  
Political Philosopher

AbstractPolitical realism is often seen as vulnerable to the “Machiavellian temptation,” that is, to the bracketing out of moral principles in the conduct of statecraft. In this article, I explore the use of Thomist themes in the writings of Martin Wight (1913–1972), a seminal figure of the so-called English School of international relations theory. Scholars have commented on the Christian realist roots of the English School, but it is little noted that Wight's most famous essay, “Western Values in International Relations,” uses the language of Thomism. By exploring the use of Thomist concepts in Wight's thought and the parallels to be found in the thought of his contemporary, Thomist political philosopher Jacques Maritain, I show how he seeks to escape the realist temptation to Machiavellianism. I then go on to sketch out the possible shortcomings of this approach.

scholarly journals The Biden Administration: An Opportunity to Affirm a Flexible and Adaptive American World Leadership

World Affairs ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 184 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-150
Author(s):  
Tanguy Struye de Swielande
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
English School ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
International Leadership ◽  
High Expectations ◽  
Strategic Design ◽  
The Many ◽  
Trump Administration

The article develops a strategic framework to redefine American international leadership under the Biden administration. While the decline of the American-led order is not a new trend, it has been accelerated under the Trump administration, which focused on domestic policies and left the global stage in disarray. The challenges are many for the new president, and many pressures can already be felt. Biden’s administration is under high expectations to stabilize the international system and deal with the many issues that the world faces: economic recovery, COVID-19, climate change, cybersecurity, and relations with China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, to name but a few. Yet, while the Biden presidency is—wrongly—understood as “U.S. back to normal,” the international stage has evolved. The article thus argues that restoring American world leadership means modifying that leadership and adapting it to the new reality. Building on management theories and the English School of international relations theories, the research presents a theoretical framework for reinventing and reconstructing a new form of leadership. It then applies the resulting strategic design to the Biden administration’s objectives and policies in the form of seven strategic recommendations. Ultimately, the article explains how the United States can remain world leader by acknowledging the current global situation and adopting a pragmatic vision of international affairs.

Introduction: Diversity and Disciplinarity in International Relations Theory

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Smith
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Structural Realism ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
English School ◽  
International Theory ◽  
The World

This text argues that theory is central to explaining International Relations (IR) and that the discipline of IR is much more relevant to the world of international relations than it has been at any point in its history. Some chapters cover distinct IR theories ranging from realism/structural realism to liberalism/neoliberalism, the English school, constructivism, Marxism, critical theory, feminism, poststructuralism, green theory, and postcolonialism. Oher chapters explore International Relations theory and its relationship to social science, normative theory, globalization, and the discipline's identity. This introduction explains why this edition has chosen to cover these theories, reflects on international theory and its relationship to the world, and considers the kind of assumptions about theory that underlie each of the approaches.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document