Ethnicity (Zuxing): From Domestic Politics to International Politics

1997 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 67-74
Author(s):  
Dong Lai
Author(s):  
Michael N. Forster

Although Herder is not usually known as a political philosopher, he in fact developed what is perhaps the most important political philosophy of his age. In domestic politics he was a liberal, a democrat, and an egalitarian; in international politics the champion of a distinctive pluralistic form of cosmopolitanism that sharply rejected imperialism, colonialism, slavery, and all other forms of exploitation of one people by another. Spanning both domains, while he enthusiastically shared the substantive goals of supporters of human rights he also developed a subtle critique of the concept itself, replacing it with his own concept of humanity. His political philosophy is theoretically minimalist and is all the stronger for being so.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Kruke

From the beginning of the West German state, a lot of public opinion polling was done on the German question. The findings have been scrutinized carefully from the 1950s onward, but polls have always been taken at face value, as a mirror of society. In this analysis, polls are treated rather as an observation technique of empirical social research that composes a certain image of society and its public opinion. The entanglement of domestic and international politics is analyzed with respect to the use of surveys that were done around the two topics of Western integration and reunification that pinpoint the “functional entanglement” of domestic and international politics. The net of polling questions spun around these two terms constituted a complex setting for political actors. During the 1950s, surveys probed and ranked the fears and anxieties that characterized West Germans and helped to construct a certain kind of atmosphere that can be described as “Cold War angst.” These findings were taken as the basis for dealing with the dilemma of Germany caught between reunification and Western integration. The data and interpretations were converted into “security” as the overarching frame for international and domestic politics by the conservative government that lasted until the early 1960s.


2021 ◽  
pp. 235-268
Author(s):  
Kathryn E. Stoner

This chapter examines the purposes of Russian power projection abroad under the regime of Vladimir Putin. The chapter reviews the various dimensions of Russian power in international politics, including its geographic domain in its immediate neighborhood and globally, as well as areas where Russian policy influence is particularly weighty. The chapter then looks briefly at different means of Russian power, like economy, conventional and nuclear defense capabilities, and human capital. It concludes that Russia is never as weak as it seems. Although it is not necessarily “the strongest” in all areas of international politics, Putin’s Russia has considerable usable power resources for the purposes of its leadership. The chapter then looks at the purposes of Russian power projection abroad. It looks first at realist arguments that insist Russia has national interests that any Russian regime would defend. These interests, according to this argument, are historically and geographically determined. Any Russian leader would seek to defend what is described as a “traditional sphere of influence.” In contrast, the author argues that Putin’s patronal autocracy has come to behave more aggressively in building and using Russia’s formidable power resources in order to maintain social stability for the sake of the regime’s survival. In this way, the chapter links Russian domestic politics to its foreign policies under Putin.


2011 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 553-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey K. Staton ◽  
Will H. Moore

AbstractAlthough scholars have made considerable progress on a number of important research questions by relaxing assumptions commonly used to divide political science into subfields, rigid boundaries remain in some contexts. In this essay, we suggest that the assumption that international politics is characterized by anarchy whereas domestic politics is characterized by hierarchy continues to divide research on the conditions under which governments are constrained by courts, international or domestic. We contend that we will learn more about the process by which courts constrain governments, and do so more quickly, if we relax the assumption and recognize the substantial similarities between domestic and international research on this topic. We review four recent books that highlight contemporary theories of the extent to which domestic and international law binds states, and discuss whether a rigid boundary between international and domestic scholarship can be sustained on either theoretical or empirical grounds.


Author(s):  
Andrei P. Tsygankov ◽  
Pavel A. Tsygankov

Unique features of Russia’s perspectives on international politics as practice can be obtained quite clearly through the investigation of the debates on Russian foreign policy orientations. Russian foreign policy has been framed out of identity politics among different political factions under highly politicized conditions. Structural changes in international politics in the 1990s complicated internal reforms in Russia and the aggravation of socio-economic conditions due to the rapid reforms which intensified conflicts between conservatives and progressives in Russian domestic politics. Unfortunately, the aspirations of Russian reformist elites to make Russia strong could not reconcile with the conservative tendency the nation showed during the worsened economy in that period. This led to conflicting evaluations of Russian identity, which caused a fundamental shift in domestic sources for foreign policies. This transformed Russia’s perspectives on international politics, which brought about changes in its foreign policy orientation. Pro-Western Liberalism played a major role in defining Russian foreign policy under the A. Kozyrev doctrine, which defines Russia’s identity as one of the agents in the West-/US-centered system of liberal democracy and the market economy. Significant challenges to this pro-Western foreign policy came not only from outside, but also from internal changes that brought more fundamental changes to Russian foreign policy. This change should be understood within the cultural and institutional context of Russian society, since this framework determines the conceptualization of “national interest” and/or the formulation of diplomatic and security policies.


Author(s):  
Elizabeth Donnelly ◽  
Daragh Neville

This chapter examines the trajectory of Nigeria’s engagement with the Commonwealth since independence, and how domestic politics and pressures, foreign policy priorities, and shifting international politics have shaped Nigeria’s influence through the Commonwealth, and how the Commonwealth in turn has influenced Nigeria. It argues that Nigeria’s ability to be strategic in its engagement as a key member state has been stymied by governance challenges at home and increasing competition from other African states as they have made gains in development and democracy. Yet Nigeria retains prominence and influence through the involvement of key individuals in the work of the Commonwealth, and since its return to civilian rule in 1999 and re-entry into the Commonwealth after its four-year suspension, has aligned with Commonwealth principles.


Significance Venezuela’s oil industry has suffered serious difficulty for a number of years, and both domestic and international politics would have to change for things to improve materially. However, even if domestic politics sees major shifts, questions will persist over whether the oil industry can ever fully recover. Impacts An eventual change of government in Venezuela will not bring rapid recovery in the oil sector. The need to diversify away from oil will become more pressing but no more straightforward. Opening the oil sector to private investment will require substantial incentives to succeed.


2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-22
Author(s):  
Jan Nederveen Pieterse

AbstractIn probing metamorphoses of power and changing understandings of power, this treatment examines the question of whether there is a general trend from coercive towards cooperative and consensual forms of power over time. This reflection unpacks power in its various dimensions, considers the contributions of Gramsci and Foucault, and then examines the hypothesis of a growing trend towards cooperative forms of power in domestic politics and civil society, and in international politics.


2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Metawe

Purpose This paper aims to contend that populism is damaging to both domestic and international politics; not only does it erode liberal democracy in established democracies but also fuels authoritarianism in despotic regimes and aggravates conflicts and crises in international system. Design/methodology/approach The research is divided into two main sections. First, it examines how populist mobilization affects liberal democracy, and refutes the claims that populism is beneficial and reinforcing to democracy. Second, it attempts to demonstrate how populism is damaging to domestic politics (by undermining liberal democracy and supporting authoritarianism) as well as international relations (by making interstate conflicts more likely to materialize). Theoretically, populism is assumed to be a strategy used by politicians to maximize their interest. Hence, populism is a strategy used by politicians to mobilize constituents using the main features of populist discourse. Findings The research argues that populism has detrimental consequences on both domestic and international politics; it undermines liberal democracy in democratic countries, upsurges authoritarianism in autocratic regimes and heightens the level of conflict and crises in international politics. Populism can lead to authoritarianism. There is one major undemocratic trait shared by all populist waves around the world, particularly democracies; that is anti-pluralism/anti-institutions. Populist leaders perceive foreign policy as the continuation of domestic politics, because they consider themselves as the only true representatives of the people. Therefore, populist actors abandon any political opposition as necessarily illegitimate, with repercussions on foreign policy. Originality/value Some scholars argue that populism reinforces democracy by underpinning its ability to include marginalized sectors of the society and to decrease voter apathy, the research refuted these arguments. Populism is destructive to world democracy; populists are reluctant to embrace the idea of full integration with other nations. Populists reject the idea of open borders, and reckon it an apparent threat to their national security. The research concludes that populists consider maximizing their national interests on the international level by following confrontational policies instead of cooperative ones.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document