International Relations and Comparative Politics

Author(s):  
Vidya Nadkarni ◽  
J. Michael Williams

Both the political science fields of International Relations (IR) and Comparative Politics (CP) developed around a scholarly concern with the nature of the state. IR focused on the nature, sources, and dynamics of inter-state interaction, while CP delved into the structure, functioning, and development of the state itself. The natural synergies between these two lines of scholarly inquiry found expression in the works of classical and neo-classical realists, liberals, and Marxists, all of whom, to varying degrees and in varied ways, recognized that the line dividing domestic and international politics was not hermetically sealed. As processes of economic globalization, on the one hand, and the globalization of the state system, on the other, have expanded the realm of political and economic interaction, the need for greater cross-fertilization between IR and CP has become even more evident. The global expansion of the interstate system has incorporated non-European societies into world politics and increased the salience of cultural and religious variables. These dynamics suggest that a study of cultures, religions, and histories, which shape the world views of states and peoples, is therefore necessary before assessments can be made about how individual states may respond to varied global pressures in their domestic and foreign policy choices.

1998 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 759-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen V. Milner

International relations has often been treated as a separate discipline distinct from the other major fields in political science, namely American and comparative politics. A main reason for this distinction has been the claim that politics in the international system is radically different from politics domestically. The degree of divergence between international relations (IR) and the rest of political science has waxed and waned over the years; however, in the past decade it seems to have lessened. This process has occurred mainly in the “rationalist research paradigm,” and there it has both substantive and methodological components. Scholars in this paradigm have increasingly appreciated that politics in the international realm is not so different from that internal to states, and vice versa. This rationalist institutionalist research agenda thus challenges two of the main assumptions in IR theory. Moreover, scholars across the three fields now tend to employ the same methods. The last decade has seen increasing cross-fertilization of the fields around the importance of institutional analysis. Such analysis implies a particular concern with the mechanisms of collective choice in situations of strategic interaction. Some of the new tools in American and comparative politics allow the complex, strategic interactions among domestic and international agents to be understood in a more systematic and cumulative way.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen J Alter ◽  
Michael Zürn

Despite the widespread sense that backlash is an important feature of contemporary national and world politics, there is remarkably little scholarly work on the politics of backlash. This special issue conceptualises backlash politics as a distinct form of contentious politics. Backlash politics includes the following three necessary elements: (1) a retrograde objective of returning to a prior social condition, (2) extraordinary goals and tactics that challenge dominant scripts, and (3) a threshold condition of entering mainstream public discourse. When backlash politics combines with frequent companion accelerants – nostalgia, emotional appeals, taboo breaking and institutional reshaping – the results can be unpredictable, contagious, transformative and enduring. Contributions to this special issue engage this definition to advance our understanding of backlash politics. The special issue’s conclusion draws insights about the causes and dynamics of backlash politics that lead to the following three potential outcomes: a petering out of the politics, the construction of new cleavages, or a retrograde transformation. Creating a distinct category of backlash politics brings debates in American politics, comparative politics, and international relations together with studies of specific topics, facilitating comparisons across time, space, and issue areas and generating new questions that can hopefully promote lesson drawing.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 367-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick McEachern

The cross-national comparative politics literature on authoritarian regimes has advanced rapidly in recent years, providing fresh insights into regime longevity, potential for successful democratization, and derivative policy choices. The study of North Korea’s politics has likewise advanced, albeit largely without reference to this budding literature. Given the paucity of data on North Korea, this article reviews and leverages the budding comparative literature to bring new perspectives on perennial debates on North Korean regime stability. The article argues the comparative literature fails to capture evolution in authoritarian regimes, including North Korea, suggesting areas for theoretical improvement. It documents political evolution in Kim Jong Un’s North Korea and draws upon cross-national findings to show how and why the one-party political structure, personalist elements, and hereditary succession identified in this analysis are stabilizing elements for the regime.


2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 631-648
Author(s):  
Tim Aistrope ◽  
Stefanie Fishel

Abstract World politics generates a long list of anxiety-inspiring scenarios that threaten to unravel everyday life with sudden and violent destruction. From total war and the concentration camps, through nuclear firestorms, global pandemics and climate disaster, the diabolical violence of the recent past and conceivable future is the stuff of nightmares. Yet International Relations scholars and practitioners are often criticized for being disconnected from the human realities of international calamity. The challenge for both is to engage world politics in a way that foregrounds the human consequences of extreme violence and depravation. In this article, we explore these difficult experiences through popular culture representations of the apocalypse, a subject of intense interest for researchers in a discipline where global destruction is a distinct possibility. However, we take a different route by engaging the apocalypse through the horror genre, the one place where human suffering is explicitly accentuated. We argue that the horror genre is at once an access point for ethical engagement with the human consequences of extreme violence and a complex terrain where dark imaginings can be politically loaded, culturally specific and ethically ambiguous.


Author(s):  
Jacqui True

Feminist scholars of international relations argue that gender is central, not peripheral, to the constitution of the state and to change “in” and “of” the interstate system. Western and non-Western patriarchal structures shape and constrain what states are, what they do, and how. They have played a crucial role in the constitution of state identities, diplomatic practices, and the maintenance, transformation, and expansion of the society of states. The unraveling of patriarchal structures in many parts of the world has implications for international society and the quest for order and justice. The increasing breakdown of patriarchal social contacts is fueling gendered violence at all levels, including the explicit targeting of women and girls in intrastate and international conflicts. This violence is at once an embodiment of, and a threat to, sovereign statehood.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gavan McCormack

In this his latest work, Gavan McCormack argues that Abe Shinzo’s efforts to re-engineer the Japanese state may fail, but his radicalism continues to shake the country and will have consequences not easy now to predict. The significance of this book will be widely recognized, particularly by those researching contemporary world politics, international relations and the history of modern Japan. McCormack here revisits and reassesses his previous formulations of Japan as construction state (doken kokka), client state (zokkoku), constitutional pacifist state, and colonial state (especially in its relationship to Okinawa). He adds a further chapter on what he calls the ‘rampant state’, that outlines the increasingly authoritarian or ikkyo (one strong) turn of the Abe government in the fifth year of its second term. And he critically addresses the Abe agenda for constitutional revision.


2004 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Thaddeus Jackson

In 1959, Arnold Wolfers published an essay entitled ‘The Actors In World Politics’ in which he suggested that the importance of the state as an actor, although undeniable, needed to be submitted to ‘empirical analysis’ and clearer theorisation if its precise role was to be ascertained. Unfortunately, almost no one seems to have heeded his advice, and the question about what we might call the person-hood of the state virtually vanished from the agenda of mainstream International Relations (IR) theory. Realists, neorealists, neoliberal institutionalists, theorists of international society, and even many Marxists were content to treat states as, in effect, big people, endowed with perceptions, desires, emotions, and the other attributes of person-hood. Significantly, they persisted in these practices even though they often admitted that – in Robert Gilpin's words – ‘strictly speaking . . . only individuals and individuals joined together into various types of coalitions can be said to have interests’ and therefore really be actors.


2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 411-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudra Sil ◽  
Peter J. Katzenstein

This article defines, operationalizes, and illustrates the value ofanalytic eclecticismin the social sciences, with a focus on the fields of comparative politics and international relations. Analytic eclecticism is not an alternative model of research or a means to displace or subsume existing modes of scholarship. It is an intellectual stance that supports efforts to complement, engage, and selectively utilize theoretical constructs embedded in contending research traditions to build complex arguments that bear on substantive problems of interest to both scholars and practitioners. Eclectic scholarship is marked by three general features. First, it is consistent with an ethos of pragmatism in seeking engagement with the world of policy and practice, downplaying unresolvable metaphysical divides and presumptions of incommensurability and encouraging a conception of inquiry marked by practical engagement, inclusive dialogue, and a spirit of fallibilism. Second, it formulates problems that are wider in scope than the more narrowly delimited problems posed by adherents of research traditions; as such, eclectic inquiry takes on problems that more closely approximate the messiness and complexity of concrete dilemmas facing “real world” actors. Third, in exploring these problems, eclectic approaches offer complex causal stories that extricate, translate, and selectively recombine analytic components—most notably, causal mechanisms—from explanatory theories, models, and narratives embedded in competing research traditions. The article includes a brief sampling of studies that illustrate the combinatorial potential of analytic eclecticism as an intellectual exercise as well as its value in enhancing the possibilities of fruitful dialogue and pragmatic engagement within and beyond the academe.


Author(s):  
A. I. YAKOVLEV

The article considers the civilizational dimension of world politics. In the conditions of the transitional era, the crisis of the Western industrial model of development, the demographic transition and the change in the technological order, the deep foundations of societies that belong to this or that civilization remain important. Religious and cultural factors began to exert a more marked influence on international political and economic processes in both East and West. Examples of this can be seen not only in the countries of the Arab East, but also in Western Europe. The transformation of the world system today is determined by the parameters of globalization and regionalization: on the one hand, the desire of Western countries led by the US to maintain its dominant position in the world, and on the other, the growing importance of nonWestern countries (BRICS, SCO, etc.). An important aspect of the ongoing confrontation is the civilizational differences, in particular, the religious and secular worldview. This circumstance does not make the “clash of civilizations” inevitable, but encourages them to cooperate and more adequately take into account the cultural and civilizational factor in international relations.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-194
Author(s):  
Arthur Pinheiro de Azevedo Banzatto

O presente artigo discute o tema da inserção internacional dos governos não centrais brasileiros e argentinos dentro contexto de integração regional que resulta na criação do Mercosul. Inicialmente, busca-se inserir o fenômeno dentro do debate teórico das Relações Internacionais, identificando suas principais correntes explicativas. Posteriormente, busca-se analisar as experiências pioneiras do estado do Rio Grande do Sul e da província de Misiones no contexto inicial da integração regional, ainda antes da criação do Mercosul.  Por fim, com o surgimento do bloco em 1991, busca-se analisar seus impactos no âmbito estadual (Brasil) e provincial (Argentina) para compreender as diferentes estratégias adotadas pelos diferentes governos não centrais com base em estudos de caso que abrangem diferentes regiões brasileiras e argentinas, identificando padrões similares nos dois países. A metodologia utilizada ao longo da pesquisa foi o da política comparada aplicada a um pequeno número de casos (small n).  Palavras-chave: Paradiplomacia, Diplomacia Federativa, Governos Não Centrais, Mercosul.     Abstract: This article discusses the theme of the international insertion of Brazilian and Argentinian non-central governments within the context of regional integration that results into the creation of Mercosul. Initially, it seeks to insert the phenomenon within the theoretical debate of International Relations, identifying its main explanatory approaches. Then, it seeks to analyze the pioneering experiences of the state of Rio Grande do Sul and the province of Misiones in the initial context of regional integration, even before the creation of Mercosul. Finally, with the appearance of the block in 1991, it seeks to analyze its impacts at the state (Brazil) and provincial (Argentina) level in order to comprehend the different strategies taken by the different non-central governments based in case studies that includes different regions of Brazil and Argentina, identifying similar patterns in both countries. The methodology used during the research was the comparative politics applied to a small number of cases (small n). Key-words:  Paradiplomacy,  Federative Diplomacy, Non-central  Governments,  Mercosur.     Recebido em: julho/2016; Aprobado em: janeiro/2017.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document