Drawing upon philosophy and social theory, Social Theory of International Politics develops a theory of the international system as a social construction. Alexander Wendt clarifies the central claims of the constructivist approach, presenting a structural and idealist worldview which contrasts with the individualism and materialism which underpins much mainstream international relations theory. He builds a cultural theory of international politics, which takes whether states view each other as enemies, rivals or friends as a fundamental determinant. Wendt characterises these roles as 'cultures of anarchy', described as Hobbesian, Lockean and Kantian respectively. These cultures are shared ideas which help shape state interests and capabilities, and generate tendencies in the international system. The book describes four factors which can drive structural change from one culture to another - interdependence, common fate, homogenization, and self-restraint - and examines the effects of capitalism and democracy in the emergence of a Kantian culture in the West.

/pdf/social-theory-of-international-politics-3eegdnnwai.pdf

Social Theory of International Politics

Twenty years ago, in the pages of the, Journal of Common Market Studies, Hedley Bull launched a searing critique of the European Community's "civilian power" in international affairs. Since that time the increasing role of the European Union (EU) in areas of security and defence policy has led to a seductiveness in adopting the notion of "military power Europe". In contrast, I will attempt to argue that by thinking beyond traditional conceptions of the EU's international role and examining the case study of its international pursuit of the abolition of the death penalty, we may best conceive of the EU as a "normative power Europe".

Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?

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

The history of international political orders is written in terms of continuity and change in domestic and international political relations. As a step toward understanding such continuity and change, we explore some ideas drawn from an institutional perspective. An institutional perspective is characterized in terms of two grand issues that divide students of international relations and other organized systems. The first issue concerns the basic logic of action by which human behavior is shaped. On the one side are those who see action as driven by a logic of anticipated consequences and prior preferences. On the other side are those who see action as driven by a logic of appropriateness and a sense of identity. The second issue concerns the efficiency of history. On the one side are those who see history as efficient in the sense that it follows a course leading to a unique equilibrium dictated by exogenously determined interests, identities, and resources. On the other side are those who see history as inefficient in the sense that it follows a meandering, path-dependent course distinguished by multiple equilibria and endogenous transformations of interests, identities, and resources. We argue that the tendency of students of international political order to emphasize efficient histories and consequential bases for action leads them to underestimate the significance of rule- and identity-based action and inefficient histories. We illustrate such an institutional perspective by considering some features of the coevolution of politics and institutions, particularly the ways in which engagement in political activities affects the definition and elaboration of political identities and the development of competence in politics and the capabilities of political institutions.

/pdf/the-institutional-dynamics-of-international-political-orders-4v1onuni6t.pdf

The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders

Todas las teorias de relaciones internacionales se basan en teorias sociales de relaciones entre agentes, procesos y estructuras sociales. Las teorias sociales no determinan el contenido de nuestra teoria internacional, pero estructuran las preguntas que nos hacemos sobre la politica mundial y nuestros enfoques en las respuestas a esas cuestiones. El principal asunto que se cuestiona en los debates sobre teoria social es el tipo de fundamento que puede ofrecer el conjunto de preguntas y las estrategias de investigacion mas provechosas para poder explicar los cambios revolucionarios que parecen estar ocurriendo en el sistema internacional desde finales del siglo XX.

/pdf/la-anarquia-es-lo-que-los-estados-hacen-de-ella-la-3wkc5gjd9s.pdf

La anarquía es lo que los estados hacen de ella: La construcción social de la política de poder

Academic conventions divide up the seamless web of the real social world into separate spheres, each with its own theorising; this is a necessary and practical way of gaining understanding. Subdivisions of social knowledge thus may roughly correspond to the ways in which human affairs are organised in particular times and places. E. H. Carr and Eric Hobsbawm have both been sensitive to the continuities between social forces, the changing nature of the state and global relationships. Critical theory is directed to the social and political complex as a whole rather than to the separate parts. Critical theory allows for a normative choice in favour of a social and political order different from the prevailing order, but it limits the range of choice to alternative orders which are feasible transformations of the existing world. The "common rationality" of neo-realism arises from its polemic with liberal internationalism.

Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory

Reader spent four years traveling, observing, and photographing a wide variety of human cultures. Whether invoking the peacefulness and gentleness of the rice growers of Bali, the murderous proclivities of the Ypese Islanders, the violent territorial defense of fishing rights in Maine, the luxuries of life in the Kalahari, or the hardships of nomadism on the east African plains, he is always concerned to show that these widely different cultures all spring naturally from their native soil. Each is a unique response to the conditions created by the land, the weather, the availability of food, and other environmental factors.

Production Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History

Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations : An Essay in Method

Part I. Overviews: 1. Beyond international relations theory: Robert W. Cox and approaches to world order Timothy J. Sinclair 2. Influences and commitments Part II. Theory: 3. The idea of international labour regulation 4. Realism, positivism 5. On thinking about future world order 6. Social forces, states and world orders 7. Gramsci, hegemony and international relations: an essay in method 8. Towards a post-hegemonic conceptualisation of world-order: reflections on the relevancy of Ibn Khaldun 9. 'Take six eggs': theory, finance, and the real economy in the work of Susan Strange Part III. Interpretations: 10. The global political economy and social choice 11. 'Real socialism' in historical perspective 12. Structural issues of global governance: implications for Europe 13. Middlepowermanship, Japan, and future world order 14. Production and security 15. Global perestroika Part IV. Multilateralism: 16. The executive head: an essay on leadership in international organisation 17. Decision making with Harold K. Jacobsen 18. Ideologies and the new international economic order: reflection on some recent literature 19. Labour and hegemony 20. Labour and hegemony: a reply 21. Multilateralism and world order 22. Globalisation, multilateralism and democracy.

Approaches to world order

In April 1970, Susan Strange published an article in the Chatham House review which challenged the mutual exclusivity of international economics and international politics.' The consequence was a rebirth of the concept of political economy in international studies. She has continued consistently her liberation struggle from academic self-enclosure, disciplinary defensiveness, and turf wars. She insisted that the new international political economy be a broad church open to historians, geographers, sociologists, anthropologists, and the whole range of humanistic studies, as well as economists and political scientists. In this, she echoed Fernand Braudel's appeal in 1958 for the integration of the human sciences in his famous essay on the longue durie. Her work never stood still. She moves forward in responding to her critics and, above all, by her acute perceptions of change in reality. She is not alone in perceiving that the field of international relations study (IR) is beset by an identity crisis.2 The problem now is notjust the need for a more ecumenical use of methods and approaches but also for a new ontology an updated view

Robert W. Cox

Papers

Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory

Production Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History

Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations : An Essay in Method

Approaches to world order

The Retreat of the State