Heretical Conversations with Continental Philosophy: Jan Patočka, Central Europe and Global Politics

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cerwyn Moore
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Continental Philosophy ◽  
Reference Points ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
European Identity ◽  
Central European ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
The Many

This article argues that the contributions of the Czech philosopher, Jan Patočka, have been overlooked in the study of International Relations (IR), and more generally international political theory. Attention here is drawn to the many distinctive ideas particular to Patočkian philosophy, such as the solidarity of the shaken and the care of the soul, which combine accounts of a Central European philosophy and dissident political reactions to totalitarian rule. The legacy of Patočka's work frames the latter part of the article, which examines Central European identity and ‘samizdat’ as often neglected reference points in IR. The article concludes by drawing these themes together in an account of rupture, inspired by the solidarity of the shaken and care for the soul.

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.

The thermonuclear revolution and the politics of imagination: realist radicalism in political theory and IR

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-274
Author(s):  
Rens van Munster ◽  
Casper Sylvest
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Practical Relevance ◽  
Public Intellectuals ◽  
Political Realism ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
Lewis Mumford

Both within political theory and International Relations (IR), recent scholarship has reflected on the nature and limits of political realism. In this article, we return to the thermonuclear revolution and the debates it spurred about what was real and possible in global politics. We argue that a strand of oppositional and countercultural thinking during this period, which we refer to as realist radicalism, has significant theoretical and practical relevance for current scholarship on political realism. Indeed, debates during the thermonuclear revolution speak to questions about the nature of realism and whether it is possible to develop a realism that is attuned to progressive or emancipatory ambitions. By focusing mainly on two radical American intellectuals – C. Wright Mills and Lewis Mumford – we show how their responses to the thermonuclear, superpower standoff challenged conventional understanding of realism and utopianism. By harnessing the concept of the imagination, they called into question pre-existing conceptions about politics and reality. The contribution of the article is twofold. First, we argue that realist political theory and IR should pay more attention to thinkers that are not conventionally regarded as canonical but whose writings and politics interrogated the limits and potential of political realism. Second, we demonstrate that the work of such public intellectuals and their calls for cultivating the imagination connect directly to current debates about political realism, including its statist bend and its (purported) conservatism.

Just War Theory in Times of Individual Rights

2018 ◽  
pp. 220-232
Author(s):  
Janina Dill
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
First Century ◽  
The Political ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
Radical Revision

Just war theory (JWT) has undergone a radical revision over the last two decades. This chapter discusses the implications of this reformulation for the role of JWT in International Political Theory (IPT) and for JWT’s strategic usefulness. Revisionists’ consistent prioritization of individual rights means JWT now follows the strictures of justified violence according to contemporary IPT. At the same time, the collective nature of war makes it impossible for anyone but the omniscient attacker to properly protect individual rights and thus to directly implement revisionist prescriptions. I argue that revisionism is strategically relevant not in spite of, but because of this lack of practicability on the battlefield. It highlights the impossibility of waging war in accordance with widespread expectations of moral appropriateness, which largely follow the strictures of justified violence according to contemporary IPT. This is a crucial limitation to the political utility of force in twenty-first-century international relations.

International Law and International Political Theory

2018 ◽  
pp. 59-73
Author(s):  
Gerry Simpson
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Theories ◽  
War Crimes Trials ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
International Diplomacy ◽  
The Way

This chapter probes the way in which description, prescription, and critique form a congeries of approaches that together, in turn, produce an intellectual field that might be described as the political theory of international law (though it is hardly one thing, and some of it refuses altogether the injunctions of traditional political theory). All of this will lead to an examination of two particular problems of international diplomacy to which political theories of international law appear to have responded: namely, intervention and war crimes trials, and an engagement with two interdisciplinary turns (to History and to International Relations) through which international law has enlivened its habits of thought and theoretical inclinations.

The house that Chuck built: twenty-five years of reading Charles Beitz

2005 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 371-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Brown
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
The Way

On the face of it, this might seem a somewhat frivolous, not to say over-familiar, title for an essay on the influence of Charles Beitz's Political Theory and International Relations (hereafter, PTIR); Beitz, however, will recognise the implicit comparison between his work and John Rawls's A Theory of Justice, and will accordingly, I hope, forgive the familiarity. But, accepting that this is a title that conveys respect, it might still be argued to be inappropriate on the rather different grounds that it substantially overstates the influence of PTIR. Can it really be the case that this relatively short (under 200 pages) volume with an over-ambitious title ‘changed the subject’ in the way that A Theory of Justice certainly did a few years earlier? Obviously the subject in question – international political theory – is rather more limited than the whole world of at least Anglo-American political theory that was changed by Rawls's work, but such a claim can, I think, be defended.

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.

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 Political Thought, International Relations theory and International Political Theory: an interpretation

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Brown
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Past History ◽  
Academic Discipline ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
History Of ◽  
International Thought

The relationship between political theory, including the history of political thought, and International Relations theory, including the history of international thought, has been, and to some extent remains, complex and troubled. On both sides of the Atlantic, the mid-twentieth century founders of International Relations as an academic discipline drew extensively on the canon of political thought, but approached the subject in an uncritical way, while political philosophers largely disdained the international as a focus. This changed in the 1970s and 1980s, with the emergence of the ‘justice industry’ based on critiques of Rawls’ A Theory of Justice and a consequent recovering of the past history of cosmopolitan and communitarian thought. A new discourse emerged in this period – International Political Theory – bridging the gap between political thought and international relations and stimulating a far more creative and scholarly approach to the history of international thought. However, in a social science environment dominated by the methods of economics, that is, formal theory and quantification, the new discourse of International Political Theory occupies a niche rather than existing at the centre of the discipline.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document