Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism

All these premises having, as I think, been clearly made out, it is impossible that the rulers now on earth should make any benefit, or derive any the least shadow of authority from that, which is held to be the fountain of all power, Adam's private dominion and paternal jurisdiction; so that he that will not give just occasion to think that all government in the world is the product only of force and violence, and that men live together by no other rules but that of beasts, where the strongest carries it, and so lay a foundation for perpetual disorder and mischief, tumult, sedition and rebellion, (things that the followers of that hypothesis so loudly cry out against) must of necessity find out another rise of government, another original of political power, and another way of designing and knowing the persons that have it, than what Sir Robert Filmer hath taught us.

Two Treatises of Government.

It comes as something ofa surprise to reflect that the New York Review ofBooks is now over twenty years old. Even people of my generation (that is, old enough to remember the revolutionary 196os but not young enough to have taken a very exciting part in them) think of the paper as eternally youthful. In fact, it has gone through years of relatively quiet life, yet, as always in a competitive journalistic market, it is the controversies that attract the interest of the reader and to which the history (especially an admittedly impressionistic survey that tries to include something of the intellectual context in which a journal has operated) must give some attention. Not all the attacks which the New York Review has attracted, both early in its career and more recently, are worth more than a brief summary. What do we now make, for example, of Richard Kostelanetz's forthright accusation that 'The New York Review was from its origins destined to publicize Random House's (and especially [Jason] Epstein's) books and writers'?1 Well, simply that, even if the statistics bear out the charge (and Kostelanetz provides some suggestive evidence to support it, at least with respect to some early issues), there is nothing surprising in a market economy about a publisher trying to push his books through the pages of a journal edited by his friends. True, the New York Review has not had room to review more than around fifteen books in each issue and there could be a bias in the selection of

http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3507774.pdf

The New York Review of Books

Mixed methods research is an approach that combines quantitative and qualitative research methods in the same research inquiry. Such work can help develop rich insights into various phenomena of interest that cannot be fully understood using only a quantitative or a qualitative method. Notwithstanding the benefits and repeated calls for such work, there is a dearth of mixed methods research in information systems. Building on the literature on recent methodological advances in mixed methods research, we develop a set of guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in IS. We particularly elaborate on three important aspects of conducting mixed methods research: (1) appropriateness of a mixed methods approach; (2) development of meta-inferences (i.e., substantive theory) from mixed methods research; and (3) assessment of the quality of meta-inferences (i.e., validation of mixed methods research). The applicability of these guidelines is illustrated using two published IS papers that used mixed methods.

/pdf/bridging-the-qualitative-quantitative-divide-guidelines-for-2pa3j69on0.pdf

Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems

Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace

This article argues that the current self-understanding of IR theory is misconceived and that it is time to move beyond the stagnant positivism/postpositivism debate. We argue that the attempt to occupy a middle ground compromise position between positivism and postpositivism is untenable because these two positions share much in common. In this sense a middle ground position between two problematic positions does not produce a less problematic position. What is needed is a metatheoretical analysis of the two extreme positions. We attempt to show how both positivism and postpositivism are embedded in a discourse of philosophical anti-realism. This anti-realism occurs as a result of what we call the post-Kantian-Humean “problem-field” of international relations from which most contemporary positivist, constructivist, and post-structuralist IR approaches stem. We then try to overcome this “problem-field” by means of radically reclaiming reality through a critical realist philosophy. Once outlined we try to show how this critical realist philosophy can help transcend some of the antinomies currently faced by IR scholars.

After Postpositivism? The Promises of Critical Realism

Introduction I. Overcoming International Relations 1. How it all Started? Can it End? A Genealogy of the International Problematic 2. Learning from Alker: From Quantitative Peace Research to Emancipatory Humanism 3. How to Tell Better Stories About World Politics II. Explicating a Critical Realist Methodology 4. Critical realist Ontology 5. Double Hermeneutics of Iconic Modeling 6. The Normative Logic of Explanatory Emancipation III. Visions of World Politics 7. Modeling Thucydides' Melos Episode 8. A Global Security Community 9. From Security to Emancipatory World Politics: Beyond 'Nordic Nostalgia' Epilogue

After International Relations: Critical Realism and the (Re)Construction of World Politics

The World Social Forum: An Open Space or a Movement of Movements?

"Patomaki and Teivainen describe a wide spectrum of democratic reform proposals. They also explore innovative ideas for new institutional arrangements - including empowering global civil society; a Global Truth Commission; referenda and a World Parliament; a debt arbitration mechanism; and global taxation. And they argue that democratic transformations at global level must involve not just democratizing institutional machinery, but revisiting the remits and powers they should have."--BOOK JACKET.

A Possible World: Democratic Transformation of Global Institutions

This book provides an innovative study of future wars, crises and transformations of the global political economy. It brings together economic theory, political economy, peace and conflict research, philosophy and historical analogy to explore alternatives for the future. Patomaki develops a bold, original and thought provoking political economy analysis of the late 20th century neo-liberalisation and globalisation and their real effects, which he describes as a 21st century version imperialism. In order for us to understand global security and to anticipate the potential threats and crises, he argues that a holistic understanding and explanation of history is necessary and demonstrates that a systematic causal analysis of structures and processes is required. Putting this theory into practice, Patomaki constructs a comparative explanatory model which traces the rise of imperialism in the late 19th century and culminated in the First World War. He argues that even a partial return to the 19th century ideals and practices is very likely to be highly counterproductive in the 21st century world and could become a recipe for a major global catastrophe. 
This book will be of interest to students and scholars of international relations, globalization studies, politics, economics and security studies.

/pdf/the-political-economy-of-global-security-war-future-crises-4c0n44bn80.pdf

Heikki Patomäki

Papers

After Postpositivism? The Promises of Critical Realism

After International Relations: Critical Realism and the (Re)Construction of World Politics

The World Social Forum: An Open Space or a Movement of Movements?

A Possible World: Democratic Transformation of Global Institutions

The Political Economy of Global Security: War, Future Crises and Changes in Global Governance