DOC PREVIEW
USC IR 369 - Lecture 1 - IR theories

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 6 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Pearl Harbor=9/11Surprise attackOn American soilUS unpreparedSignificant loss in lifePearl harbor not 9/11Pearl harborNation state behind attackMilitary targetMultipolar worldNews spread by radioJoined allies in war9/11terrorist cell behind attack (non state actor)civilian and military targetsunipolar worldturned down allied offers to help in warnews spread by television; power of imagessurprise: only actors were able to bring down twin towersrealists: cared about who caused it?Components of a theoryActors: individuals (people and states) and/or institutionsIncentives: money. Power, prestige?Actions: what can actors do to get what they want?Constraints- international system, norms (simply saying its not OK, is that enough?), resources (not attacking because we simple don’t have the resources), other actorsOutcomes-foreign policies, wars, sanctions, strategiesWhat makes theory good?Coherence: can you explain it to othersGeneralizabilityPlausibility: do assumptions accord with realityTestability: confirm or disprove this?Accuracy: does it actually explain what’s going onRealismExist in a an unchanging world of anarchyStates=only actors, not UN or WTOInterested only in survival, security and sovereigntyAll actions aimed at securing the above in an anarchic worldMost important level: international; domestic politics of a country don’t really matter only what they can project into an international agendaOutcome=strong military, low tolerance for external influence into your own affairs, willingness to use force, defensive trade policyPessimistic view of human natureBalance of power, a world power emerges, other countries ally against it to bring it down and this continues over and overClassical realists: HobbesLiberalismEven in a world of anarchy there can be change and cooperation; value cooperation, see you can achieve more in cooperation than on your ownPrimary actors are states, but there are other actors as wellInterested in own health and welfare- can achieve many waysInterested in institutions, treaties, and orgsDon’t just use military force to achieve goalsOutcome: WTO and other international orgs. Believe they can enforce international norms and delete anarchyInterest in others domestic policiesLiberalists:John locke, Jeremy bentham, sociological liberalism: Richard CobdenInterdependence liberalism: Stanly Hoffman, Joseph Nye, Andrew moravcsikRepublican liberalism: KantLarry Diamond on the democratic peaceDemocracies don’t fight each otherCan every country become a democracy?Answer: there is no model of governance with any broad normative appeal or legitimacy in the world other than democracyDiamond defines democracy as “a system of government in which the people choose their leaders at regular intervals through free, fair, and competitive elections”By this definition: mid 1970s Greece and spain and 9 latin American countries, 1987 phillipines, 1987: martial law lifted in Taiwan, 1989: eastern Europe, Chile, 1991: Pakistan, Nepal, BangladeshSummary: all states can become democratic because most states already are1974: there were 41/151 states democraciesToday: 2/5ths of the worlds states are democraciesAdam przeworskiFrom 1950 to 1990 no country with per capita income higher than $6055 in 1985 PPP dollars suffered a breakdown of democracyConstructivismConstructs that matter are the ones that we think matter (ie no objective significant other than that which we assign)Actors: constantly changingConstraints: Norms that govern society, radically new conceptActions: words matter as much as forceInfluence IR with concepts and ideas not just wealth and forceAlternative approachesFocus on public opinionInterest groupsA group of individuals or orgs that share common objective and take actions to influence the policy process to favor that outcomeExamples: trade based, defense related, ethnic groupsDomestic institutionsJohnson announced on news BEFORE hand about attack on Vietnam, so the unit was capturedInternational political economyMain strands:mercantilism: notion that econ are subordinate to politicsliberalism and Marxismchallenges to mercantilismAdam smith: liberalismMarxism: most important factor is the con class struggle which is constant in all nations; international theoryKeynesianismKeynes, updated econ liberalismInternational societyReject notion that IR theory is a scienceDisagree with realists that there is a structure of IR that operates with law like regularityRather, base your understanding on philosophy, history, lawHedley bull, martin Wight, Henry KissingerIR theories 16/11/2011 03:03:00Pearl Harbor=9/11- Surprise attack- On American soil- US unprepared- Significant loss in life← Pearl harbor not 9/11- Pearl harboroNation state behind attackoMilitary targetoMultipolar worldoNews spread by radiooJoined allies in war- 9/11oterrorist cell behind attack (non state actor)ocivilian and military targetsounipolar worldoturned down allied offers to help in waronews spread by television; power of imagesosurprise: only actors were able to bring down twin towers- realists: cared about who caused it?← Components of a theory- Actors: individuals (people and states) and/or institutions- Incentives: money. Power, prestige?- Actions: what can actors do to get what they want?- Constraints- international system, norms (simply saying its not OK, is that enough?), resources (not attacking because we simple don’t have the resources), other actors- Outcomes-foreign policies, wars, sanctions, strategies- What makes theory good?oCoherence: can you explain it to othersoGeneralizabilityoPlausibility: do assumptions accord with realityoTestability: confirm or disprove this?oAccuracy: does it actually explain what’s going on← Realism- Exist in a an unchanging world of anarchy- States=only actors, not UN or WTO- Interested only in survival, security and sovereignty- All actions aimed at securing the above in an anarchic world- Most important level: international; domestic politics of a country don’t really matter only what they can project into an international agenda- Outcome=strong military, low tolerance for external influence into your own affairs, willingness to use force, defensive trade policy- Pessimistic view of human nature- Balance of power, a world power emerges, other countries ally against it to bring it down and this continues over and over- Classical realists: Hobbes← Liberalism- Even in a world of


View Full Document

USC IR 369 - Lecture 1 - IR theories

Download Lecture 1 - IR theories
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Lecture 1 - IR theories and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Lecture 1 - IR theories 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?