Final Review Slides - Introduction to Politics 2024 PDF

FINAL REVIEW SLIDES  The One’s Who Walk Away In a basement under one of the beautiful public buildings of Omelas, or perhaps in the cellar of one of its spacious private homes, there is a room. It has one locked door, and no window. A little light seeps in dustily between cracks in the...

FINAL REVIEW SLIDES  The One’s Who Walk Away In a basement under one of the beautiful public buildings of Omelas, or perhaps in the cellar of one of its spacious private homes, there is a room. It has one locked door, and no window. A little light seeps in dustily between cracks in the boards, second-hand from a cobwebbed window somewhere across the cellar. In one corner of the little room a couple of mops, stiff, clotted, foul-smelling, stand near a rusty bucket. The floor is dirt, a little damp to the touch, as cellar dirt usually is.  The One’s Who Walk Away In the room a child is sitting. It could be a boy or a girl. It looks about six, but actually is nearly ten. It is feeble-minded. Perhaps it was born defective, or perhaps it has become imbecile through fear, malnutrition, and neglect. It is afraid of the mops. It finds them horrible. It shuts its eyes, but it knows the mops are still standing there; and the door is locked; and nobody will come. The door is always locked; and nobody ever comes, except sometimes - the child has no understanding of time - sometimes the door rattles terribly and opens, and a person, or several people, are there. One of them may come in and kick the child to make it stand up. The others never come close, but peer in at it with frightened, disgusted eyes.  The One’s Who Walk Away "I will be good," it says. "Please let me out. I will be good!" They never answer. The child used to scream for help at night, and cry a good deal, but now it only makes a kind of whining, and it speaks less and less often. It is so thin there are no calves to its legs; its belly protrudes; it lives on a half-bowl of corn meal and grease a day…it sits in its own excrement continually. They all know it is there, all the people of Omelas. Everyone in this ‘happy’ city, know of the presence of this child. How does that make you feel?  The One’s Who Walk Away Some of them have come to see it, others are content merely to know it is there. They all know that it has to be there…they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this child's abominable misery. When the children of Omelas, turn between 8-12, they tell them about this secret of the ‘city of happiness’ and take to see the tortured child. The children feel disgust and go home crying after seeing it.  The One’s Who Walk Away But there is one more thing to tell, and this is quite incredible. At times one of the adolescent girls or boys who go to see the child does not go home to weep or rage. It does not, in fact, go home at all. Sometimes also a man or woman much older falls silent for a day or two, and then leaves home. These people go out into the street, and walk down the street alone. They keep walking, and walk straight out of the city of Omelas, through the beautiful gates. They leave Omelas, they walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back. The place they go towards is a place even less imaginable to most of us than the city of happiness. I cannot describe it at all. It is possible that it does not exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas. Politics and the State Chapter 1  The Political Importance of the State Central concept in the study of politics The sovereign state is the highest form of authority in a particular territory and is, in theory, above any challenge Theoretically above challenge both internally (domestically) and externally (internationally) Sovereign state model emerges in Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries (1648 Treaty of Westphalia)  The Political Importance of the State Most countries now make use of the sovereign state model But how useful is the concept of sovereignty in today’s world? – What sort of challenges does sovereignty face? What about “failed states”?  What Modern States Do Modern states do 4 things: 1. Legislation 2. Executive 3. Administrative 4. Judicial Different forms of government vary in the ways they implement these  Executiv e Legislati Judicial ve Stat Administration e  LEGISLATION Making of laws. This includes who makes those laws, what areas of social life are open to law-making, and how the process of law making happens.  EXECUTIVE Responsible for implementing the laws passed by legislators. The Head of Government is the Chief Executive. Different systems, either Presidential or Parliamentary, implement laws differently. ‘Steering’ the car.  EXECUTIVE Executive Powers: Defense Minister – Enforces the Law in the Army Interior Minister – Enforces the law in police and public safety Justice Minister – Enforces what the Judiciary says about court cases, criminal cases. Foreign Minister – Enforces policy through Ambassadors and diplomatic  ADMINISTRATIVE Responsible for ‘PUTTING GAS’ so the car moves. The administration is really talking about making something work towards specific goals. Coordination is central for successful administration. The governance of a society is a highly complex responsibility in terms of managing the relationship between citizens, the state, organizations or different government offices.  ADMINISTRATIVE Administration is made even more complex with demands for accountability. As citizens, we want to know how decisions are made and why things are done as they are. This demand for knowledge requires that the trail of decision-making be easily followed.  ADMINISTRATIVE Today, as many ‘Western’ democracies reduce the size of government they start to shift administrative functions to the ‘private’ sector. The delivery of government services are now being done by individuals, or groups, for profit. Education, health, transportation, jails, even the military – given to the private sector. What does this mean?  ADMINISTRATIVE Even though selling these government- owned entities to the private sector may increase efficiency and lower the spending of the government, the problem is that the ability to ensure accountability and trust the ‘new owners’ to work for the interest of ‘people’ is severely damaged.  JUDICIAL The fourth function of government is the judicial function. Laws are not always precise and they may be differing views as to whether and how they should be enforced. It is the responsibility of the judges to decide what is acceptable or not.  Theories of the State Pluralism - Society is made up of many competing groups. What governments do reflect the balance of power of those groups. Think of government as an arbiter Elitism - Argues that all societies are led by a unified, self-conscious elite “Iron law of oligarchy”: all complex organizations will come under the direction of a dominant group (eventually). Elites can be economic, military, administrative, or religious  Institutionalism Focus on formal political processes Often descriptive and comparative Neo-institutionalism demonstrates that institutions have independent effects on political outcomes What would be a major flaw of focusing on laws, rules and formal  Institutionalism A major flaw of institutionalism is that it ignores the meanings people bring to laws, rules and regulations. It is one thing to have a law and quite another how people live it.  Pluralism Pluralists argue that governance of modern society is too complex and large to nurture direct participation of everyone in the political process. Society composed of competing groups seeking different political outcomes and competing for power. This competition is free and individuals choose their groups and leaders. Often used to describe liberal democratic politics  Elitism Society composed of groups, leaders and followers Elites control levers of power to their own ends Overemphasizes cohesion of elites and power over masses. Criticizes both institutionalism because of being set in motion by a ‘mobilization of bias’ and pluralism for ignoring most leadership and politics arise from the middle-class or higher. Few hold power, many do not. Elite theorists argue that a select few in all societies  Indigenous Conception of Power Some societies have worked out ways to reduce the power of individual leaders and ensure that political power is spread out as much as possible within a community For many Indigenous peoples, good leadership is temporary, based on particular circumstances and needs or the gifts of the leader, and followers are under no obligation to follow once the particular task of the temporary leader has been accomplished European conceptions of power and accumulation of wealth and resources differ from Indigenous views of leadership. “Any man who has accumulated a great deal of wealth for himself has not been very good at giving  Multiculturalism Challenge to traditional models of national citizenship Advocates pluralistic states that include a variety of religious, cultural, and ethnic identities Increasingly important in literally multicultural societies Criticism of Multiculturalism Critics have questioned multiculturalism’s ability to preserve anything but the most shallow and stereotypical of cultural attributes—such as only language Stanley Fish (1997) and “boutique” multiculturalism.  Criticism of Critics Criticism of Stanley Fish: Who is the host culture? What about Indigenous people? The assumption that Canada belongs only to a select group of people whose ethnic origin is in Western Europe and a certain strand of people aligned to their culture. Cultures are tolerated and even celebrated, until they conflict with the ingrained value systems of the privileged sections of society and their values. This, then, creates a potential clash of values.  SUPRA-Constitutional Documents & Rule of Law Supra-constitutional documents mean something that is even more sacred than the constitution itself. Examples: 1.Canada: Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982)  Canadian Charter of Rights Whereas and Freedoms Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: Rights and freedoms in Canada 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject Constitutions & Rule of Law Constitutions - blueprint for national governments, describing division of powers and responsibilities of state institutions and right of citizens Rule of Law - fundamental principle of liberal democracies that all citizens  Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is commonly referred to as the “notwithstanding clause.” Provincial or federal governments can use section 33 when they want to pre- emptively shield a law from judicial invalidation on these specific grounds, or when they want to revive a law that has already been invalidated by a court on these grounds. While an invocation of section 33 expires after five years (as  Notwithstanding Clause Quebec In 1988, Quebec used the clause in response to a Supreme Court of Canada decision that the province’s law allowing French-only on commercial signs offended freedom of expression. In 2019, the Legault government used the clause preemptively to pass Bill 21, a law that prohibited certain public sector workers from wearing religious symbols in their workplaces. Saskatchewan Civil Society, Interest Groups, and the Media  Problems with Civil Society (2 of 3) After the election of US President Barack Obama, disgruntled American conservatives formed the “Tea Party” movement, which helped lay the basis for the rise of Donald Trump – This supposedly grassroots movement argues that they are true patriots, standing for authentic American values – They promote what they call “Non-negotiable Core Beliefs” Guns Immigration – most immigrants are illegal Crime Army We are the ‘good’ guys Downsize government Cut taxes English is our language Problems with Civil Society (3 of 3) Other end of the political spectrum, in late 2012 Idle No More movement was founded – Seeking to take a stand against the Conservative government’s disrespect for the rights of Indigenous peoples as well as their disregard for the environment  Interest Groups “Associations formed to promote a sectional interest in the political system” (Robertson, 1993) Large component of civil society – Present in all societies, including dictatorships Some have argued against them as fractious, inherently troublesome  Interest Groups, cont’d Insider groups focus on lobbying (the government) Outsider groups focus on winning over public opinion  Puhle’s Eight Types of Interest Groups 1. Professional associations 2. Groups of business, commerce, and industry 3. Trade unions 4. Agricultural organizations 5. Single-interest groups (e.g., NRA in the US) 6. Ideological interest groups (e.g., the Fraser Institute or religious groups) 7. Public interest groups (e.g., Amnesty International) 8. Welfare associations (e.g., CNIB) Bureaucracies, Policymaking, and Governance Chapter 10  The Public Service (1 of 4) The Canadian federal government, with more than 270,000 employees in 300 different organizations, is the largest employer in the country Many modern states organize themselves on the model of the British civil service (model) – Heavy focus on the impartiality and separation of civil servants from political roles – Establishment of regular staff for routine tasks and administration for policy formulation – Recruitment based on competitive examination  The Public Service (2 of 4) Bureaucracies intended to be neutral Bureaucrats exchange political commitment for job security Was an important innovation in the development of the democratic state, although it also helped in the control of colonized peoples as well Such systems were accountable to the electorates in their home countries, but rarely, if ever, to the colonized peoples  The Public Service (3 of 4) This can pose problems if new leaders want to introduce sweeping reforms In the US, the President can appoint up to 9,000 senior bureaucratic officials (a tiny portion of the ~3 million government bureaucrats) – Many other countries have similar behaviours, though not as wide-sweeping as the US for top positions  The Public Service (4 of 4) Different forms of bureaucracy formed in different countries Greater tendency for overlap between administrative, political, and business elites in Europe Most obvious in the case of France, where the École nationale d’administration has trained generations of public officials, some of whom have gone on to glittering careers in the state administration and then into politics Colonial powers often exported their bureaucratic style to their colonial holdings, with said countries often continuing to use them after their independence (i.e. India)  The Indian Civil Service (ICS) Bureaucracies can have very positive effects Modeled on the British civil service, the ICS is credited with: 1.Creating a sense of Indian unity; resisting regionalism 2.Facilitating good, limited government via its competence 3.Proving that the modern state can put  “Embedded Autonomy” Term borrowed from developmental political economy and coined by Peter Evans Bureaucratic decision-makers are influenced by society, but also detached enough to determine the public interest and follow an appropriate path Used to help explain the economic and administrative success of Asian countries (particularly in the 1970s-80s)  Theories of Bureaucratic Policymaking Principal–agent relations: refers to situations where the actions of two or more agents must be harmonized, even if their interests are not the same In state bureaucracies, policy makers (principals) and bureaucrats (agents) are in a hierarchical relationship Principal–agent relationships can be nested within each other  Theories of Bureaucratic Policymaking, cont’d Two main aims: 1. To clarify how bureaucracies make decisions and implement them 2. To find ways to help principals ensure that outcomes conform to policy objectives  New Public Management (NPM) Emphasis on “incentives, competition, and performance” over rule-based hierarchies – A quality- and performance-based approach to public management Ideas drawn from economics and business management Treats the public sector as no different than the private sector Critics point to issues of corruption that can be exacerbated by this model (since countries that boast NPM already had well-developed civil services)  “Agencification” (1 of 3) Dividing functions to create new agencies (often from within and under other set agencies) Intended to simplify administration, but worked to undermine homogeneity of civil service Largely focused on the attainment of pre-set targets for performance  “Agencification” (2 of 3) Agencification part of a “hollowing out” of the state – This involves a devolution of authority implementation and reduction of state control over various functions it is supposed to (or used to) perform Brownlee, Hurl, and Walby outline three aspects of corporatization: The creation of organizations for delivering public services Changing the nature of how organizations conduct themselves to be more like corporate actors Closer linking together of corporate and public worlds  “Agencification” (3 of 3) Contradicted by calls for greater efficiency in delivery of services New problems of accountability – With so many agencies, the relationship between them and the parliament became increasingly difficult to navigate. Who is to blame if a target is not met? Who decides? Agentification can also result in watchdog organizations being too heavily influenced by the very industries they are supposed to be monitoring  Governance “The capacity of governments to make and implement policy—in other words, to steer society” (Pierre and Peters, 2000) Not restricted to governments (as in “corporate governance”) Recent emphasis on “good governance”, with a stronger focus  Good Governance 1. An effective state that enables economic growth and equitable distribution 2. Civil societies and communities that are represented in the policy-making process, with the state facilitating political and social interaction and promoting societal cohesion and stability 3. A private sector that plays an independent and productive role in the economy (Kayizzi-Mugerwa, 2003)  Policy Communities, “Iron Triangles,” and Issue Networks Policy communities: closed, stable “subgovernments” responsible for policy-making in specific areas Also refers to external groups with special interests in those areas Proponents argue that long-term exchange between groups will tend towards a convergence of interests  “Iron Triangle” Officials, politicians, and interest groups work together to formulate policy in a specific issue area Type of policy community found in countries like the US and Japan Members of the US Congress are subject to lobbying both by various interest groups (often business organizations) and by other members of Congress  Issue Network Some argue that policy community concept is too restrictive Issue networks are looser collections of “policy activists,” academics, professionals, and other individuals Large groups encompassing a range of interests, with irregular contact, and plenty of disagreement – As opposed to policy communities, which are relatively small and clearly focused with greater member interaction The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull Throughout the history of modern states system there have three competing traditions of thought; the Hobbesian (Realism or Realist tradition) which views international relations as a ‘state of war,’ the Kantian or universalist position, which sees at work in international politics a potential one community of mankind (Idealist tradition or Idealism) and the Grotian tradition which focuses on international politics taking place in  Professor Bull’s analysis does the following: Compare and contrasts these three diverging perspectives on International relations. 1.Hobbesian 2.Kantian 3.Groatian Reveals that each of these traditional patterns of thought have a clear description of the nature of international politics and a set of prescriptions about international conflict. Or, in other words, how to achieve world order. Like a Doctor, The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull Hobbesian (Realist Tradition or Realism) – Thomas Hobbes. Th theory of describes international relations as a ‘state of war’ of all against all, an arena of struggle in which each state is fighting against every other. The particular international activity that is most typical of the entire international political system is war. PEACE, IS A PERIOD OF RECUPERATION FROM THE LAST WAR AND PREPARATION FOR THE NEXT. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Hobbesian (Realist Bull or Realism) – tradition Thomas Hobbes. This theory of International Relations believes that the ‘state’ is free to pursue its goals in relations to other states without moral or legal restrictions of any kind. Ideas of morality and law, on this view, are valid only in the context of a society based on a set of laws. International life is beyond laws or morality. The only basis of laws that may limit the actions of another is prudence or expediency or fear of the consequences. Thus, agreements may be kept if it is advantageous to keep them, but may be The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull KANTIAN – Idealism or universalist tradition. This theory of international relations, is at the other extreme. International relations is not about conflict but cooperation and on the ‘transnational social bonds that link all human beings who are citizens of states. The dominant theme here is the relationship among states, specifically and really the relationship of all men in the community of mankind - which exists potentially, even if it does not exist actually, which they hope will miraculously come into being and sweep away the system of states into one global country following the same rules. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull Within the Idealist tradition, the community of all mankind share all the same interests. The particular international activity that most typifies this theory is the ‘horizontal conflict of ideology that cuts across the boundaries of states and divides human society into two camps – the trustees of the immanent community of mankind and those who stand in the way; those who are the true faith and the heretics, the liberators and the oppressed. In other words, there is a global struggle between those who wish to develop ‘one culture, one The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull The Idealist/Kantian theory also holds that there are moral principles in the field of international relations but these principles do not encourage cooperation and coexistence of states, but rather the overthrow of the state system. This is to be replaced by a ‘cosmopolitan society.’ The single community of mankind, on the Kantian view, is not only the central reality in international relations, in the sense that people actually want this to happen and actively are engaged in making this a reality. This is the highest moral objective for which they struggle. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull Grotian tradition – International Society Grotian tradition (international society) or internationalist tradition stands between realism and idealism. The Grotian tradition describes international politics in terms of a society of states or international society. As against Hobbes, the Grotians contend that states are not engaged in a simple struggle, like gladiators in an arena, but are limited in their conflicts with one another by common rules and institutions. However, Grotians accept the Hobbesian principle, realist, that sovereigns and states are the principal reality in international politics; the immediate members of the international society are The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull International politics in the Grotian understanding expresses neither complete conflict of interest between states nor complete identity of interest; it resembles a game that is partly distributive and partly productive. The particular international activity which best typifies international activity as a whole is not war between states, nor horizontal conflict cutting across boundaries but trade – economics. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull Grotians inform us, as doctors, that the prescription for peace in the international system is that all states, in their dealings with one another, are bound by rules and institutions. However, against the ‘universalists’ – the objective is not to overthrow the state system and replace it with the universal society of mankind. It is the acceptance of the requirements of coexistence and cooperation in a society of states based on the rule of law. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull OVERVIEW Now, according to Hedley Bull: the Kantian, Hobbesian and Grotian theories of international relations provide us with a broad overview of international relations. Remember, his method of describing these three trends is similar to what we studied about realism, idealism and the international society but he discusses these three trends a little differently. Also, there exists a wide variation of theories within these three broader categories. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull The Element of Society Hedley Bull says: the modern international system in fact reflects all three elements singled out and discussed (Realism: Hobbesian, Idealism - Kantian and Universalist - Grotian). This includes the element of war and struggle for power among states, the element of transnational solidarity and conflict which cuts across the boundaries of countries and the element of cooperation and regulated order and justice among states based on international rules. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull In different historical phases of the state system, in different geographical theatres of operation and in the policies of different states and statesmen, one of these three elements may dominate over the others. In other words, these three forces are always working at the same time in International relations depending on the states and people involved. No one single theory is solely responsible for understanding international relations. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull This is the error committed by those who speak or write as if the European Union, the United Nations or the International Court of Justice are principal factors in international relations; as if international law were to be assessed only in relation to its function of binding states together, and not to its function as an instrument of state interest and a weapon for transnational purposes; as if attempts to maintain a balance of power were to be interpreted only as attempts to preserve the system of states and not as sneakiness on the part of specific powers to gain power; as if great powers are viewed as ‘great leaders’ and not great predators; as if wars are fought only to uphold law or advance justice and not because simply to advance the interests of particular  International Relations WHAT IS INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS? The study of relations between states, non- state or transnational relations across borders and the operation of the system as a whole. Comprehensively, this includes the roles of Inter-governmental organizations, non- governmental organizations and multinational corporations.  International Relations Relations between states. Non-state The actors and International their System transnational Worl relations. d Orde r they lay on each of these forms While they may vary in the stress of interaction, all theories in IR propose some explanation of each; indeed the major debates in IR revolve around these three dimensions and the primacy of one or the other.  International Relations Why Study International Relations? The entire population of the world is divided into separate territorial political communities, or independent states, which profoundly affect the way people live. Together, those states form an international system that is global in extent. How many countries in the world today?  International Relations Why Study International Relations? At the present time there are about 195 independent states in the world. Different almanacs, and different countries, will give different answers. Why? Nevertheless, everybody on earth, with very few exceptions, not only lives in one of those states but is also a citizen of one of them. This means, that every human being is connected to a state and, thereby, to the state system. Alexis de Tocqueville – Excerpts of his writing. 1. Alexis de Tocqueville – “Tyranny of the Majority.” 2. Alexis de Tocqueville - “Nature of Modern Servitude.”  Tyranny of the Majority I hold it to be impious and detestable maxim that, politically speaking, the people have the right to do anything; and yet I have asserted that all authority originates in the will of the majority. Am I, then, in contradiction with myself? Does Tocqueville contradict himself? 80  Tyranny of the Majority A general law, which bears the name justice, has been made and sanctioned, not only by a majority of this or that people, but by a majority of mankind. The rights of every people are therefore confined within the limits of what is just. What does he mean by the just? Who decides what is just? 81  Tyranny of the Majority A nation may be considered as a jury which is empowered to represent society at large and to apply justice, which is its law. Ought such a jury, which represents society, to have more power than the society itself whose laws it executes? When I refuse to obey an unjust law, I do not contest the right of the majority to command, but simply appeal from the sovereignty of the people to the sovereignty of mankind. 82  Tyranny of the Majority Some have not feared to assert that a people can never out-step the boundaries of justice and reason in those affairs which are peculiarly its own; and that consequently full power may be given to the majority by which it is represented. But this is the language of the slave. A majority taken collectively is only an individual, whose opinions, and frequently whose interests, are opposed to those of another individual, who is styled a minority. 83  Tyranny Tyranny of of the the Majority Majority If it be admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should not a majority be liable to the same reproach? Men do not change their characters by uniting with one another; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with their strength. For my part, I cannot believe it; the power to do everything which I should refuse to one of my equals, I will never grant to any number of them… 84  Tyranny of the Majority Unlimited power, is in itself, a bad and dangerous thing. Human beings are not competent to exercise it with discretion. God Alone can be omnipotent, because his wisdom and his justice are always equal to his power. There is no power on earth so worthy of honor in itself or clothed with rights so sacred that I would admit its uncontrolled and all-predominant authority. 85  Tyranny of the Majority When I see that the right and the means of absolute command are conferred on any power whatever, be it called a people or a king, an aristocracy or a democracy, a monarchy or a republic, I say there is the germ of tyranny, and I seek to live elsewhere, under other laws. How should we balance this? What safeguards should we have? Distribution of power? 86  Tyranny of the Majority In my opinion, the main evil of the present democratic institutions in the United States does not arise, as is often asserted in Europe, from their weakness, but from their irresistible strength. I am not so much alarmed at the excessive liberty which reigns in that country as at the inadequate securities which one finds there against tyranny. What does this mean? 87  Tyranny of the Majority When an individual or a party is wronged in the United States, to whom can he apply for redress? If to public opinion, public opinion constitutes the majority; if to the legislature, it represents the majority and implicitly obeys it; if to the executive power, it is appointed by the majority and serves as a passive tool in its hands. 88  Tyranny of the Majority The public force consists of the majority under arms; the jury is the majority invested with the right of hearing judicial cases; and in certain states even the judges are elected by the majority. However iniquitous or absurd the measure of which you complain, you must submit to it as well as you can. 89  Organization of Lecture Organization of Lecture The Nature of Modern Servitude – Alexis de Tocqueville  The Nature of Modern Servitude ‘Democratic governments may become violent and even cruel at certain periods of extreme effervescence or of great danger, but these crises will be rare and brief’. Alexis de Tocqueville begins by stating the uniqueness of the current democratic government in world history. This uniqueness is such that the danger is not of it being a very active society, violent or cruel. Democracy has a different danger. What do you think it is?  The Nature of Modern Servitude When I consider the petty passions of our contemporaries, the mildness of their manners, the extent of their education, the purity of their religion, the gentleness of their morality, their regular and industrious habits and the restraint which they almost all observe in their vices no less than their virtues, I have no fear that they will meet with tyranny in their rules, but rather with guardians. What does he mean by guardians?  The Nature of Modern Servitude I think, then, that the species of oppression by which democratic nations are menaced is unlike anything that ever existed before in the world; our contemporaries will find no prototype of it in their memories. I seek in vain for an expression that will accurately convey the whole idea I have formed of it; the old words ‘despotism’ and ‘tyranny’ are inappropriate: the thing itself is new, and since I cannot name it, I must attempt to defend it. What does he mean here?  The Nature of Modern Servitude I seek to trace the novel features under which despotism may appear in the world. The first thing that strikes the observation is an innumerable multitude of men, all equal and alike, incessantly endeavoring to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives. What does he mean ‘procure the petty and paltry pleasures?  The Nature of Modern Servitude Each of them living apart, is a stranger to the fate of all the rest; his children and his private friends constitute to him the whole of mankind. As for the rest of his fellow citizens, he is close to them, but does not see them; he touches them, but he does not feel them; he exists only in himself and for himself alone; and if his kindred still remain to him, he may be said at any rate to have lost his country.  The Nature of Modern Servitude Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which takes it upon itself alone to secure their gratifications and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing.  The Nature of Modern Servitude For their happiness, such a government willing labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness; it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances: what remains, but to spare them all the trouble of thinking and all the trouble of living? ‘creating over-sized babies’  The Nature of Modern Servitude Thus it every day renders the excuse of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range and gradually robs a man of the uses of himself. The principle of equality has prepared men for these things; it has predisposed men to endure them and often to look on them as benefits.  The Nature of Modern Servitude After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.  The Nature of Modern Servitude The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd.  The Nature of Modern Servitude I have always thought that the servitude of the regular, quiet and the gentle kind which I have just described might be combined more easily than is commonly believed with some of the outward forms of freedom, and that it might even establish itself under the wing of the sovereignty of the people.  The Nature of Modern Servitude Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions: they want to be led and they wish to remain free. As they cannot destroy either the one or the other if these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people.  The Nature of Modern Servitude They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain. Hedley Bull says: the modern international system in fact reflects all three elements singled out and discussed (Realism: Hobbesian, Idealism - Kantian and Universalist - Grotian). This includes the element of war and struggle for power among states, the element of transnational solidarity and conflict which cuts across the boundaries of countries and the element of cooperation and regulated order and justice among states based on international rules. In different historical phases of the state system, in different geographical theatres of operation and in the policies of different states and statesmen, one of these three elements may dominate over the others. In other words, these three forces are always working at the same time in International relations depending on the states and people involved. No one single theory is solely responsible for understanding international relations. The Idea of International Society – Hedley Bull This is the error committed by those who speak or write as if the European Union, the United Nations or the International Court of Justice are principal factors in international relations; as if international law were to be assessed only in relation to its function of binding states together, and not to its function as an instrument of state interest and a weapon for transnational purposes; as if attempts to maintain a balance of power were to be interpreted only as attempts to preserve the system of states and not as sneakiness on the part of specific powers to gain power; as if great powers are viewed as ‘great leaders’ and not great predators; as if wars are fought only to uphold law or  In 2011, the US, Britain, France, and then NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Orga­- nization) attacked Libya and deposed the THE de facto president, Muammar al-Qaddafi. LENSES Since 2014, battles have raged between the UN-backed Government of National Ac­- cord and the Libyan National Army, led by General Khalifa Haftar. How do we understand this political violence?  THE LENSES Is it a struggle between states trying to serve their national interests by improving their positions in the regional balance of power? Or is it a humanitarian crisis brought on by a clash of individuals, terrorists, states, and multinational corporations that must be resolved through UN mediation? Perhaps it is an imperial war over the redistribution of oil and yet another example of the rapa­- cious exploitation of Africa by transnational corporations and global superpowers?  How we answer these and similar questions in global politics depends, THE in important ways, on which international relations (IR) theory we LENSES favour. Different theories highlight distinctive aspects of the complexities and contradictions of international cooperation and conflict.  This chapter develops its discussion of international relations in four stages: – First, it distinguishes between the international and the global and explains the necessity and politics of theory. – Second, it surveys three key approaches to the study of international rela­tions. More specifically, it discusses the different ways that realist, liberal, and Marxian theories understand the "what" of global politics. – Third, it outlines three notable theoretical approaches that have disrupted dominant theories of international relations: constructivism, poststructural­ism, and gender analysis. – Fourth, the chapter closes with some thoughts about the COVID-19 pan­demic and international relations. International Relations or Global Politics International relations is an exciting field that goes by many names, such as interna­tional studies, world politics, and foreign affairs. The dominant term international relations has two notable conceptual implications. First, it limits the field to relation­ships between states (Cox 19966, 144). Second, it draws a sharp distinction between politics "inside" the national state and politics "outside" of it. When a person speaks of "international relations," they conceptualize the world as consisting of territorially defined national states and self-determining communities. The language of "global politics" conceives the world differently. As a broader, more inclusive term, global politic includes inter-state relations, as well as a wide set of actors, relations, and processes, including transnational corporations and non­ governmental organizations; class, gender, and race relations; and exploitation and dispossession. The shift in language allow for a conceptual shift in the basic unit of analysis from the individual state to the totality of the global. Finally, the term global politics recognizes the interdependence between domestic politics and global affairs.  Some scholars and many students want to see theory as optional or as academic and unnecessary, but theory is essential to understanding global politics. In fact, atheoretical understandings of the international and global are impossible. As Smith, Dunne, and Kurki argue, "the option of non-theoretical accounts of the world is sim­ply THEORY not available" (Dunne, Kurki, and Smith 2016, 7-8). Facts are not self-evident, and they never speak for themselves (Said 1984, 34). What appears as reality is always produced and mediated through concepts and theories. Theory acts like a lens, which magnifies, brings some aspects into focus, obscures others, or pushes them out of sight (Baylis, Smith, and Owens 2017, 4).  THEORY For example, John Mearsheimer, a well- known realist, explains that none of us could understand the world we live in or make intelligent decisions without theories. Indeed, all students and practitioners of international poli­tics rely on theories to comprehend their surroundings. Some are aware of it and some are not, some admit it and some do not; but there is no escaping the fact that we could not make sense of the complex world around us without simplifying theories. (Mearsheimer 2001, 8-9)  THEORY Similarly, Robert Cox, a distinguished international political-economist, contends that "We cannot define a problem in global politics without presupposing a certain basic structure consisting of the significant kinds of entities involved and the form of significant relationships among them" (Cox 19966, 144).  THEORY Although Mear­sheimer and Cox view the world through very different theoretical lenses, they both emphasize that the complex task of explaining global politics always rests on implicit and explicit theoretical foundations. This suggests that the selection of one theoretical approach over another is, itself, a political act. One can either use theory to maintain existing relations of domination and subordination, or one can endeavour to change these relations by challenging dominant institutions, power relations, and processes,and imagining more equitable alternatives. International Relations FOCUS Theories Security: Power politics, Realism conflict and war Freedom: Cooperation, Idealism/Liberalism peace and progress Order and Justice: Shared interests, rules and International Society institutions Welfare: Wealth, poverty International Political Economy: and equality/inequality Modernization/Dependency Culture: Values, Beliefs Social Constructivism and Principles Post-Structuralism Knowledge and Power. Social Conditions for Gender Analysis Gender  Realism:The Primacy of the State There are varieties of realism variously associated with names such as Thucydides, Hans Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, and John Mearsheimer. Despite their differences, all of the variants subscribe to what has been termed as the "three Ss": statism, sur­vival, and self-help (Dunne and Schmidt 2011, 93).  Realism: Survival If one state attacks another there is no world government to prevent them. Power is the only deterrent. This is why many states invest so heavily in their armed forces. To further strengthen their national security, states often enter into military alliances. When security/survival is the most important feature of International Relations it describes the ‘realism’ theory. Realism operates on the assumption that relations of states can best be described as a world in which armed  Realism: Self-Help If one state attacks another there is no world government to prevent them. Power is the only deterrent. This is why many states invest so heavily in their armed forces. To further strengthen their national security, states often enter into military alliances. When security/survival is the most important feature of International Relations it describes the ‘realism’ theory. Realism operates on the assumption that relations of states can best be described as a world in which armed  Security Paradox SECURITY DILEMMA Today, the state is increasingly assuming more and more responsibilities. Among them, ensuring the safety and well being of its citizens, from both internal and external threats. To maintain their own safety, states have weapons. However, the more weapons the state owns the more other countries might begin to feel afraid. This occurs while its own citizens feel more secure. This paradox is called a ‘security dilemma,’ weapons give us security, but also cause insecurity for others. Is there something that you do, that you like, but others may dislike? What responsibilities do we have to one another?  What is the most important feature of IR? Freedom States are usually expected to uphold both personal and national freedom, or independence. A fundamental reason for having states and putting up with the burdens that governments place on citizens like taxes, military service, is that it is a condition to maintain freedom. We cannot be free unless our country is free too. Freedom is only possible when there is peace. This leads to the ‘Idealist’ or ‘Liberal’ theory which believes that relations between states are characterized by cooperation with each other to maintain peace and freedom and to  What is the most important feature of IR? Order and Justice States have a common interest in establishing and maintaining international order so that they can coexist and interact on a basis of stability, certainty and predictability. To that end, states are expected to uphold international law: to keep their treaty commitments and to observe the rules, conventions and customs of the international legal order. They are also expected to follow accepted practices of diplomacy and to support international organizations. States are also expected to uphold human rights.  What is the most important feature of IR? Order and International law, Justice diplomatic relations, and international organizations can only exist and operate successfully if these expectations are generally met by most states, most of the time. Today, there is an elaborate international legal framework for human rights – civil, political, social and economic, which is continuously being developed. Order and Justice are some of the most important principles of international relations which leads to International society theory that describes relations between states as socially responsible actors who  What is the most important feature of IR? Welfare States are usually expected to uphold is the population’s socioeconomic wealth and welfare. People expect their governments to adopt appropriate economic policies to encourage high employment, low inflation, steady investment and the uninterrupted flow of trade and commerce. Because national economies are rarely isolated from one another, most people expect the state to respond to international economic environment in such a way as to maintain the national standard of living.  Describing the reason for relations between states? WELFARE States nowadays try to frame and implement economic policies that maintain the stability of the international economy upon which they are all increasingly dependent. That usually involves economic policies that can deal adequately with international markets, the economic policies of other countries, with foreign investment, foreign exchange rates, international trade, transportation and communications. Economic interdependence is a striking feature of our international state system.  What is the most important feature of IR? Welfare Some people consider this a good thing because it may increase overall freedom and wealth by expanding the global marketplace and thereby increase participation, specialization, efficiency and productivity. Other people consider this to unjust because it promotes overall inequality by allowing rich and powerful countries - those with financial and technological advantages, to dominate poor and weak countries that lack those advantages. Wealth and welfare are obviously important values in international relations. When the relations between states is primarily about ‘economics’ then the theory is  What is the most important feature of IR? Social Constructivism Most IR theories focus on military power, economic strength, or balance of power between states. However, social constructivists believe that is false and the most important aspect of international relations is cultural. Furthermore, they insist that this social reality is not objective, or external to the observer of international relations. In other words, it is not a physical entity but something that exists because we describe it that way. Consequently, the study of IR must focus on the ideas, values, principles of the actors in the international system.  What is the most important feature of IR? Social Constructivism The focus of social constructivism is on human awareness and consciousness and its place in world affairs. The international system is made by ideas, not material forces. Emphasis on the social construction of reality. Focus on ideas, culture, civilization and values.  What is the most important feature of IR? Social Constructivism Constructivism contends that the world is not an objective reality separate from human beings, but is, instead, a construction of how human beings think, speak, and interact. Global politics and the knowledge produced in international relations are constantly made, unmade, and remade through the social processes of thinking, communicating, and interacting.  What is the most important feature of IR? Social Constructivism Poststructural analysis, drawing heavily on the work of Michel Foucault and advanced by scholars such as David Campbell, James Der Derian, and R.B.J. Walker, disrupts the discipline of international relations by rethinking epistemology, problematizing the process of representation, and emphasizing the transformative power of discourses.  What is the most important feature of IR? Social Constructivism Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with the assumptions that make knowing possible, how knowledge is produced, and by whom. The dominant theories of international relations are premised on epistemic realism, or the assump­ tion that there is a "real" world "out there" separate from, and objectively prior to, the interventions of human activity. Poststructuralism turns the idea of this relation­ship on its head, positing that the assumptions that make knowledge possible actually shape the material world.  What is the most important feature of IR? Social Constructivism the realist terms of For example, thinking and talking about the world in self-interested, egocentric, and power-seeking states creates a realist world of self-interested, egocentric, and power-seeking states. Ideas are given form in words and pictures and performed in deeds. This, in turn, necessarily involves issues of language and interpretation. Global politics do not come pre-labelled but, instead, are constantly given different and competing meanings, which, in turn, result in different responses. For example, a news article can represent the explosion of a bomb as  What is the most important feature of IR? Social Constructivism For example, a news article can represent the explosion of a bomb as: singular act of madness, an act of terrorism designed to intimidate populations or governments, Or, among many strategic tactics in the cause of freedom for the oppressed  Chapter 16: International Relations How we understand political events depends on the theories of international relations (IR) we use – Overthrow of the Qadhdhafi regime in Libya 2011 Different IR theories highlight different aspects of international cooperation and conflict The international versus the global Realist, liberal and Marxian theories of IR Disruptive theories: – constructivism, poststructuralism, gender analysis Impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on IR  What are International Relations and Global Politics? IR sees world as comprised of defined and self-determining national states – Focuses on relationships between states – Distinguishes between politics inside the state and outside of it Global politics broader, more inclusive term – Includes inter-state relations and wider set of actors, relations and processes such as gender and class – Recognizes interdependence between domestic politics and global affairs  What are International Relations and Global Politics? (1) Theory essential to understanding international and global politics – Helps us make sense of complex world around us Selection of one theory over another in itself a political act – Maintain existing relations of domination and subordination – Or challenge dominant institutions, power relations, and processes Study of global politics is necessarily political – “Theory is always for someone and for some purpose”  Realism Varieties of realism but all subscribe to the three S’s: statism, survival and self-help Statism – State is the pre-eminent actor in IR – Struggle for power between states to realize national interests – Unequal playing field: differences between states in terms of wealth, resources, capabilities, military power – National states as sovereign rational actors – States power-seeking due to anarchy (no centralized authority)  Realism (1) Survival – Just as humans have an innate drive for survival, so too is survival a core interest of all states – But survival not guaranteed under anarchy – Competition for survival a zero-sum – In order to survive state must exercise more power than competitors  Realism (2) Self-Help – IR as a self-help system Under anarchy each state must rely on its own power – Absence of a global sovereign creates “911 problem” – Security dilemma created as each state seeks to increase own power – Balance of power States banding together to keep others in check NATO and the Warsaw Pact during Cold War  Liberalism Also variants of liberalism Core elements: individualism, interdependence, and international institutions Individualism – World consists of self-interested and rational individuals – Individuals choose to cooperate to realize gains and achieve peace in international arena – Domestic analogy: Like individuals states have different characteristics Institutions that establish order domestically should be replicated in international politics  Liberalism (1) Interdependence – Democratization promotes peace internationally – Interdependence and relationship-building leads to less conflict between states – Emphasis on economic interdependence and soft power Expansion and deepening of the free market in economic sphere guarantees freedom in the political sphere Use of persuasion and cooperation to realize common interests and universal values  Liberalism (2) International Institutions – Institutions chief means to realize common interests through cooperation World Bank, IMF, WTO – Domestic rule of law paralleled by system of international law – Collective security: collective response to aggression League of Nations United Nations – Liberalism sees IR as more complex and multifaceted than realism  Marxian Theory Less influential compared to realism and liberalism Different perspectives within Marxian theory but four key themes: – Reality as a totality – Focus on relations and processes – Materialist conception of history – Emancipatory political project  Marxian Theory (1) Global politics a capitalist totality made up of colonies, cores, peripheries and hegemons Global political economy as matrix of antagonistic social relations and processes – Core accumulates profit by exploiting the periphery International relations as ongoing struggle between unequal social forces Goal is empowerment and emancipation of the global working class and the end of its exploitation through revolution Challenges the status quo, dominant interests, and influential theories of IR  Disruptive Theories In late 20th century, grounding assumptions of realism, liberalism and Marxian theory challenged by new perspectives – Constructivism – Poststructuralism – Gender analysis Make visible processes and people typically ignored and marginalized by dominant theories  Constructivism Sparked by the inability of realism and liberalism to explain collapse of the Soviet Union Assumes global politics to be about malleability and change rather than fixed and rooted in human nature Focuses on the power of ideas instead of military force and economics  Constructivism Sees world not an objective reality but construction of how human beings think, speak and interact Challenges assumptions about naturalness of anarchy and self-help system If they are willing to conceive of themselves differently, states can mutually construct a global order based in cooperation rather than conflict – Construction of new norms on landmines, human security, Responsibility to Protect (R2P)  Poststructuralism Draws on work of Michel Foucault Focuses on transformative power of discourses Rethinking of epistemology – How knowledge is produced and by whom How we think about the world is how we create the world  Poststructuralism (1) Through language and interpretation we give meaning to global events – A bomb as an act of madness, act of terrorism, act of freedom for the oppressed Representation and interpretation of events are social processes, suffused with power relations Truth not based on objective reality but produced through discourses, which can change – Environmental discourses as example  Gender Analysis Many variants of gender analysis in IR Asks the question, where are the women in global politics? Gender as a power relation  Gender Analysis (1) Makes visible women’s exclusion from positions of power in IR, their lived experiences and contributions to global order – Recognition of rape as a war crime – UN’s Gender Development Index  Gender Analysis (2) Draws attention to issues such as: – Global gendered division of labour – Gendered violence – Intersections of gender, race and class in Global North and South – Differential impacts on women and other genders of international events, processes and structures  Conclusion IR theory as a debate amongst competing perspectives Enriched by newer theories emphasizing the importance of ideas, discourses and identity in international and global politics IR challenged by COVID-19 pandemic Different IR theories provide insights on different aspects of the pandemic In turn, each theory is transformed through crisis  Nature’s first green is gold, Her hardest hue to hold. Her early leaf’s a flower; Nothing Gold Can But only so an hour.Stay – Robert Frost Then leaf subsides to leaf. So Eden sank to grief, So dawn goes down to day. Nothing gold can  “The most ominous of modern perversions is the shame of appearing naïve if we do not flirt with evil. Nicolas Gomez Davilla  Chapter 17 Learning Objectives 17.1Trace some big ideas that have defined the international order historically. 17.2Review the formation of state systems in Western and non-Western contexts. 17.3Outline the evolution of some of the foundational concepts, theories, and ideas that continue to shape the international order. 17.4Discuss the limitations of Western political thinking about the origins and evolution of state building. 17.5Assess the impacts of imperialism, colonialism, and neoliberal globalization on contemporary international order. 17.6Introduce new ways to think about a future justice- oriented international order.  Chapter 17: International Orders How do we understand an international order comprised of 200 sovereign countries? “International order” implies peace and harmony – But reality is war, conflict and disorder – Present system is failing – The rules-based order is under threat: Is anyone a terrorist? Focus on assumptions, rules, conventions, institutions and relationships in understanding international order – unipolar, bipolar, multipolar  International Orders IR theory views questions of international order through lens of national states – Motivations for state behavior And the liberal international order post WWII – The rules, conventions and institutions to promote democracy, human rights and free markets around the globe United Nations World Bank  International Orders (1) 21st century politics betrayed optimism of liberal triumphalism End of Cold War did not result in global victory of liberalism and capitalism Can we even speak of international order in face of disorders? – Rise of populism, nationalism, protectionism – Proliferation of authoritarian leaders – Absence of coordinated responses to COVID-19 and climate change – Progressive decline of US influence in international affairs  National State: It’s Older than You Think Emergence of states marked qualitative change in history of societies – Exercise of supreme political authority (sovereignty) within a recognized territory Dominant view: states evolved due to constant warfare between European principalities and Empires – Need for stable boundaries – Control over internal affairs – Right to repel external threats Treaty of Westphalia 1648  National State: It’s Older than You Think (1) Eurocentric, “war made the state” perspective challenged – Emerged not from wars but from diverse groups cooperating to achieve broader public good Evidence from non-Western world shows state has longer history – State building occurred in non-Western world prior to emergence in Europe Indus Valley Civilization China MesoAmerica Polynesia Africa National State: It’s Older than You Think  National State: It’s Older than You Think (2) Why ignored in IR theory? – Western cultural biases and experiences – Link between European state formation and colonialism obscured Transfer of wealth and resources from colonized lands and peoples to European centres What do we miss by ignoring diverse origins of states and drivers of international order in earlier times? How do we see beyond the state as only organization of life? International Order: A Continuum of Concepts and Structures Realism and liberalism’s focus on nation-states fail to offer effective tools to understanding current crises: – Global financial – Political – Environmental Challenged by constructivist approach – Examines complex relationships of actors, social norms, interests and identities in shaping international order International order not fixed in eternal struggle for state dominance but always shifting ius natural International andtoius order assumed gentium be contest between freedom and order – ius natural (natural law) Peace and harmony with freedom Greek city states – ius gentium (law of nations) War and conflict Persian and Roman Empires ius natural and ius gentium (1) Tensions led to establishment of local governments, international order, international law – Social contract – Just war theory (St. Thomas Aquinas) – Positive and natural law of nations (Grotius) Peace of Westphalia – State sovereignty United Nations Exceptions to ius natural and ius gentium: Slavery, Imperialism and Colonization Exceptions made to ius natural and ius gentium to justify slavery, imperialism and colonization Based on construction of non-Europeans as exotic, uncivilized Other Justification for: – Slavery in ancient Rome and the US – Spanish colonization of the Americas – Colonization of Indigenous peoples in Canada, Australia Indigenous lands as terra nullius Indigenous peoples incapable of sovereignty due to “savage” nature Exceptions to ius natural and ius gentium: Slavery, Imperialism and Colonization (1) Indigenous sovereignty over lands and resources seen as threat to settler state sovereignty and territorial integrity Colonization framed as “civilizing mission” Treaties used to justify actions under ius gentium – Tools of of conquest and subjugation Settler resistance to Indigenous self-  The Colonial Present Inequities of colonialism an ongoing process Plays out internally as well as internationally in resource distribution and political power – Inadequate access to clean water, housing, food – Disproportionate representation of Indigenous peoples in child welfare and prison systems – Absence of Indigenous peoples in decision- making forums  The Colonial Present IR scholars highlight racism in world politics and in IR theory and practice – Global mass protests in wake of 2020 murder of George Floyd IR’s inability to answer questions abut racialized dimensions of international security and organization being challenged by scholars  Current International Order and Future Prospects End of Cold War celebrated as victory for political and economic liberalism Norms of global cosmopolitanism expected to create international cooperation and harmony Universalization of – Democratic values – Rule of law – Free market Leading to global peace and prosperity  Current International Order and Future Prospects (1) Instead of global peace and prosperity, opposite happened This century marked by: – Sustained conflict and war – Ascendance of illiberal regimes – Growing gap between rich and poor – Economic instability – Accelerating global climate crisis – COVID-19 pandemic  Current International Order and Future Prospects (2) Despite institutions, norms and regimes promoting cooperation, national agendas prevail Also logics of neoliberalism and unrestrained free market – Karl Polanyi and The Great Transformation – Pre-modern economies in non-West based on principles of reciprocity and redistribution  Current International Order and Future Prospects (3) Prior to European dominance, collective action drove national and international systems – Compassion not conflict main driver in human history – Human rights and cosmopolitanism not just Western but universal concepts New transnational reality emerging due to globalization, mobility and mass media  Possible Roads Ahead IR continues to be dominated by state- centric perspectives Moving beyond the state requires us to recognize past models of cooperation and coexistence through a non-Western lens Need to consider the following in shaping international orders: – Race and ethnicity – Class and inequality – Gender and sexuality – Nationalisms and identity  Possible Roads Ahead (1) These critical perspectives necessary in developing decolonial approaches in IR Universality of the cosmopolitan ideal – The earth is one family (Indian) – All my relations (Indigenous) Cosmopolitan perspectives more promising in finding solutions to global problems than war/violence/force logic of existing  Conclusion Dominant theories of IR only provide part of the picture of the evolution of national and international order Constructivism provides a richer historical and structural analysis – Broader conceptual lens challenges assumptions of IR as axiomatic Allows us to more fully consider consequences of existing global order and better address emerging crises and inequalities