Liberalism Flashcards
(57 cards)
1
Q
What is Kant’s perpetual peace?
A
Philosophises on how an international peace could be made permanent
2
Q
Liberal accounts of politics and IR
A
- It is rational to be good
- Immorality is self-destructive
- Pursuit of perpetual peace is a moral end from which humanity derives its capacity for free action
- Self-interest to be moral and good
3
Q
3 definitive articles
A
- Articles as conditions for peace
- Each article ties to causes of war: domestically, internationally and in international interactions
4
Q
First definitive article
A
- Cause for war is the internal structure of states
- Republican constitution as a solution
- States will need to have good reason to go to war and convince their citizens, hence, more careful and restrained behaviour
- Implies the need for states to be well-governed because they are faced by continuous threat from the outside
5
Q
Second definitive article
A
- International right of non-intervention in other states
- Gradual emergence of a zone of peace where the use of force will be curbed over time
- Federation as a solution to the problem of the security dilemma
6
Q
Third definitive article
A
- Cosmopolitan right must be limited to universal hospitality
- Right of the alien not to be treated as an enemy
- Financial power and trade lead to peace as you can only trade with people if you do not treat them as enemies upon arrival
- Trade leads to common interests in the welfare of others
7
Q
Interdependence
A
- Concept by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye
- States should no longer be seen as the sole actors in IR - transnational actors and international organisations were relevant to explaining IR
- Acknowledges anarchy
- States do not just have self-defined goals but know they are dependent on each other in many areas
8
Q
Relative vs absolute gains
A
- Neoliberals: If a state profits from an interdependent relationship, they need not be concerned if other makes even larger gains
= Absolute gains therefore are important - In an interdependent world, where absolute gains matter, rational actors will privilege cooperation
This is where institutions come into the picture
9
Q
The Prisoner’s Dilemma
A
- Game theoretical model to illustrate the dynamics of interdependence
- Two robbers arrested and interrogated separately
- Different consequences of confessing or remaining silent
due to interdependence - If both act rationally, one must assume that both will confess and get 5 years’ prison time each
- Yet, they both get a strategic gain if they do not confess
10
Q
The Prisoner’s Dilemma and Neoliberalism
A
- Neoliberals use the prisoner’s dilemma as symbolic of states’ interdependent relationships in IR
- They argue that international institutions make cooperation achievable and more probable by:
1. Fostering trust
2. Making costs high of going back on a deal
3. Monitoring agreements
11
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Key arguments
A
- Kant’s rejection of World Government
- The Nature of Cosmopolitan Law
- The Concept of a Federation of States
- Kant’s Views on Progress Towards Perpetual Peace
- Kant’s Rigidity and Moral Philosophy
- The Unresolved Tension in Kant’s Liberalism
12
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Argument - Kant’s rejection of world government
A
- He prioritises the autonomy and sovereignty of individual states, advocating for a more restrained form of international engagement
- This rejection is rooted in Kant’s belief that states must not be coerced into a universal order
- Autonomy allows for internal governance to evolve without external interference, fostering a republican government as essential for peace
13
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Argument - the nature of cosmopolitan law
A
- Kant’s cosmopolitan law doesn’t entail a comprehensive global governance structure
= it serves the purpose of facilitating peace among republican states - while universal rights and moral progression are ideals, the operational framework must respect the existing sovereignty of states
14
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Argument - the concept of a federation of states
A
- Characterised by mutual non-aggression - this federation should not undermine the internal affairs of its members
- Defines this federation as a ‘free-federation’, focused only on the rejection of war-like actions
- Kant promotes a minimalistic form of cooperation that preserves the essential functions and identities of sovereign states
15
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Argument - Kant’s views on progress towards perpetual peace
A
- The possibility of progress towards peace must involve the internal transformation of states and the promotion of republican governance
- Kant identifies 3 systemic elements that contribute to the cause of war:
1. Individual human character
2. Societal structures
3. The anarchic nature of IR - his belief that republican governmetns have pacific tendencies suggest that states governed by the will of their citizens have a vested interest in maintaining peace
16
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Argument - Kant’s rigidity and moral philosophy
A
- This rigidity signifies Kant’s commitment to a universal moral law
- However, it also leads to tensions in practical scenarios where moral imperatives may conflict with the realities of international politics
- This can lead to a perceived inflexibility in addressing complex international dilemmas
17
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Argument - The unresolved tension in Kant’s liberalism
A
- tension in Kant’s thought between statist interests and cosmopolitan ideals
= doesn’t offer a straightforward solution to the problems of IR - It calls into question the efficacy of national sovereignty in an increasingly interconnected world
18
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
“He embraces…a…”
A
“…federation with the power to enforce the law”
19
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
“Positive functions…”
A
“…of the state system”
20
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Strengths
A
- Integration of statism and cosmopolitanism
- Moral imperative in international politics
21
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Strength - integration of statism and cosmopolitanism
A
- Kant’s conceptualisation distinguishes between the state system’s necessity and the potential for a cosmopolitan order
- this duality addresses the balance that IR theorists must navigate between state sovereignty and global governance
- This perspective allows IRT scholars to consider how states can interact within the framework if global norms while retaining autonomy
= promotes a nuanced discourse on state behaviour in a globalised world
22
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Strength - moral imperatives in international politics
A
- Kant’s emphasis on morality injects a moral dimension into IR that is often overlooked in realist theories
- the pursuit of peace is not just a strategic choice, but a moral obligation
- this encourages IRT scholars to incorporate normative theories into their analyses
= prompts discussion about humanitarian intervention, global justice etc.
23
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Weaknesses
A
- Overemphasis on rationality and morality
- Limited recognition of asymmetries of power
- Idealism vs practicality
24
Q
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Weakness - overemphasis on rationality and morality
A
- Kant’s reliance on the rationality of states and the moral imperatives guiding their actions may overlook the complexities of human nature and the diverse motivations that drive state behaviour
- in reality, states often act based on irrationality, fear and self-interest, which cannot be adequately addressed by Kant’s idealistic framework
- this creates a shortcoming in understanding how aggressive nationalism, domestic politics and power dynamics can influence state actions in ways that contradict the rational and moral aspirations Kant proposes
25
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Weakness - limited recognition of asymmetries of power
- Kant’s vision of a federation of free states assumes a level of equality and mutual respect among states that ignores the existing hierarchies and power asymmetries in the international system
- In practice, powerful states may dominate weaker ones, undermining the prospects for genuine cooperation
- This diminishes the applicability of Kant’s principles to real-world scenarios, where the political and economic leverage of certain nations can dictate the terms of IR, often leading to oppression rather than partnership
26
“Kant and the Kantian paradigm in international relations” - Andrew Hurrell
Weakness - idealism vs practicality
- the aspirational nature of Kant’s perpetual peace contrasts with the pragmatic realities of international politics, where conflicts often arise from deeply entrenched historical grievances or cultural differences
- Kant tends to underestimate the persistence of conflict and the challenges of reconciling diverse national interests, making it difficult to apply his theories effectively in addressing contemporary international conflicts
- this may lead to disillusionment when seeking solutions that fail to account for the complicated motivations and dynamics that underpin global relations
27
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Key arguments
1. Introduction to cosmopolitanism
2. Key concepts of Kant’s philosophy
3. The changing nature of sovereignty
4. The challenges of the Iraq War
5. Implications for global governance
28
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Argument - introduction to cosmopolitanism
- Wolin identifies cosmopolitanism as a political theory advocating for a global perspective in governance, where all individuals are considered part of a shared humanity
29
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Argument - key concepts of Kant’s philosophy
1. Republican norms:
- Kant imagined that republican equality should apply to IR, meaning states should operate under the governance of shared laws that ensure peace rather than conflict
2. Transnational citizenship:
- Wolin critiques the static nature of state sovereignty and identifies the emergence of individuals as bearers of rights regardless of their state affiliations
30
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Argument - the changing nature of sovereignty
- The legitimacy of state sovereignty has been challenged in light of global governance frameworks like the EU and international courts (EG European Courts of Justice)
- These developments signify a shift towards a cosmopolitan law that prioritises individual rights over state privilege
31
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Argument - the challenges of the Iraq war
The text outlines how the 2003 Iraq War represents a critical setback to the cosmopolitan project:
- Unilateralism vs. Multilateralism: The invasion was marked by a unilateral decision made by the U.S. and the UK, which undermined international law and the principles of collective security. This action illustrated how great powers can selectively adhere to international norms
* Public Trust and Democratic Accountability: Wolin suggests that there was a disconnect between public justification and true motivations, thereby violating the ethical expectations of governance
* Cosmopolitan versus National Interests: The war exemplified how national interests can overshadow humanitarian and cosmopolitan considerations, raising questions about the integrity of international legal systems
32
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Argument - implications for global governance
1. Global democracy:
- The vision of global democracy has become more complex due to factors that challenge democratic norms, making participation in global governance more demanding
2. Social and economic rights:
- EG the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which includes social and economic rights alongside civil and political rights
- this broadens the scope of cosmopolitanism beyond political freedoms
33
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
“The ‘republic of states’ envisioned by Kant would thus…”
“…supplant the existing anarchic state of international affairs”
34
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Strengths
1. Integration of normative ethics and governance
2. Critique of sovereignty and its implications for global citizenship
3. Addressing challenges of realism through cosmopolitan ideals
35
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Strength - integration of normative ethics and governance
- Wolin’s emphasis highlights the necessity of ethical considerations in international governance
- He explains how normative ethics can critically evaluate international policies and practices
- this challenges realist paradigms that often prioritise power and state interests over ethical imperatives
- this makes us consider not just what states can do, but what they should do
36
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Strength - critique of sovereignty and its implications
- Wolin's exploration of the diminishing sovereignty of states due to globalisation presents a compelling critique of traditional notions of state-centrism in IR
- This directly contributes to liberalism by advocating for a model of global citizenship that transcends national borders
- Individual rights should take precedence over rigid state sovereignty, allowing for a richer understanding of how global governance can align with the principles of justice
37
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Strength - addressing challenges of realism through cosmopolitan ideals
- By highlighting the pitfalls of the Iraq War, Wolin underscores the tension between idealistic cosmopolitanism and the brutal realities of international politics
- His argument propels the conversation regarding how cosmopolitan norms can be effectively operationalised to counteract unilateral actions
- This engagement with realism ultimately makes liberalism more resilient by questioning how its ideals can be pragmatically realised amidst existing power structures
38
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Weaknesses
1. Overemphasis on normative ethics at the expense of power dynamics
2. Inadequate attention to sovereign state structures
3. Neglect of constructivist perspectives on identity and norm formation
39
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Weakness - overemphasis on normative ethics at the expense of power dynamics
Realism
- By prioritising ethical considerations over the strategic calculations inherent in state behaviour, Wolin's arguments may come across as overly idealistic
- This diminishes the role of power, which is a fundamental concern in theories such as Realism, where anarchy and the pursuit of national interests dictate state actions
- By not accounting for the role that power dynamics play in shaping international interactions, Wolin’s analysis may lead to a skewed understanding of how and why states may comply with or reject cosmopolitan ideals in practice
40
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Weakness - inadequate attention to sovereign state structures
English school
- He underestimates the resilience of sovereign state structures in shaping IR
- His arguments suggest a progressive decline of state sovereignty, which contradicts the enduring significance of states as primary actors in global politics
- Wolin’s view may overlook how states actively negotiate and shape cosmopolitan norms within the parameters of their sovereignty
- The English School articulates that while global governance exists, it is often mediated through state-centric approaches, which balance national interests with collective human rights agendas
41
“The idea of cosmopolitanism: from Kant to the Iraq war and beyond” - Richard Wolin
Weakness - neglect of constructivist perspectives on identity and norm formation
Constructivism
- Wolin’s analysis doesn’t address how identities and social constructs influence international norms and principles of cosmopolitan governance
- By focusing predominantly on philosophical ideals, he risks oversimplifying the dynamic nature of norm evolution in IR, overlooking how norms are constructed and contested through social interactions
- This can lead to an incomplete understanding of how these ideals are implemented, undermining the feasibility of cosmopolitanism in various geopolitical contexts.
42
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Key arguments
1. Neoliberalism
2. Distinctions between realism and neoliberalism
3. Neoliberalism insight on conflict and cooperation
4. The role of institutions
5. Causation of cooperation
43
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Argument - neoliberalism
- Neoliberalism focuses on the role of institutions in promoting cooperation among states
- The anarchic nature of IR does not prevent cooperation but rather necessitates it, as states seek to maximise their interests through mutual gains facilitated by institutional frameworks
44
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Argument - distinction between realism and neoliberalism
- Realists tend to argue that international politics is characterised by conflict, with institutions playing a limited role
- Neoliberal institutionalists contend that while conflict exists, cooperation is also prevalent, facilitated by the presence of institutions that can help mitigate the anarchic nature of international relations
45
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Argument - Neoliberal insight on conflict and cooperation
- Neoliberalism argues that many conflicts arise not from the nature of states but from a failure to use institutions effectively
- institutions can help states move towards mutually beneficial outcomes by facilitating equitable agreements and reducing transaction costs associated with cooperation
- Neoliberals see cooperation as achievable and suggest that major gains can be realised through proper institutional frameworks
46
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Argument - the role of institutions
- Facilitate cooperation by reducing uncertainty and creating an environment for dialogue and negotiation
- they can help states overcome the challenges posed by anarchy
- However, Jervis also critiques neoliberalism for its somewhat optimistic view regarding information as while it can enhance cooperation, it cannot change conflicts over interests and vital goals
47
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Argument - causation of cooperation
- Cooperation can occur when states change their strategies rather than their core preferences over outcomes
- EG, if states can be made to understand that cooperation yields greater benefits than conflict (through better information or institutional frameworks), they are more likely to cooperate
- Neoliberals argue for the importance of efficiency and mutual gain, focusing on international political economy and environmental issues, where cooperation seems more achievable compared to traditional security issues
48
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
“Neoliberalism believes that there is much more…”
“…unrealised or potential cooperation than does realism”
49
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
“Neoliberalism argues that[…]…”
“…institutions are efficacious instruments for this purpose”
50
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Strengths
1. Recognition of potential for cooperation
2. Importance of institutions
3. Nuanced understanding of conflict
51
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Strength - recognition of potential for cooperation
- It counters the pessimistic view held by realists that conflict is inherent in international relations
- By accentuating the mutually beneficial outcomes that can arise, this perspective offers a more optimistic and constructive framework for understanding international interactions
- This helps to explain collaborative efforts in areas such as trade, which may be overlooked by other theories that downplay the importance of institutions and cooperation
52
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Strength - importance of institutions
- Institutions are portrayed as active participants in shaping IR by fostering communication
- This focus leads to a greater understanding of how norms and institutions shape state preferences and actions, influencing the outcomes of international interactions
- This can provide insights into the functioning and resilience of international organisations, especially in addressing global challenges like climate change or transnational terrorism, where collective action is crucial
53
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Strength - nuanced understanding of conflict
- The argument highlighting that some conflicts can be resolved through cooperation, presents a more sophisticated understanding of the international landscape
- It challenges the simplistic binary of peace versus war, suggesting that states can navigate a range of interests and preferences
- Also promotes a focus on interdependence, providing an understanding of how states manage competition and cooperation simultaneously
- It acknowledges that states can be both adversarial and cooperative, fostering a balanced way of analysing conflicts
54
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Weaknesses
1. Overemphasis on cooperation
2. Neglect of power asymmetries
3. Assumptions of rationality and fixed preferences
55
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Weakness - overemphasis on cooperation
Realism
Underplays the pervasive and persistent nature of conflict in IR
- By focusing on the conditions good for cooperation, it risks glossing over the structural constraints posed by an anarchic international system that often drives states toward competition and conflict
- Neoliberalism may overlook the realpolitik aspects of state behaviour
- This overly optimistic view does not account for the aggressive actions states might undertake when they feel threatened
56
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Weakness - neglect of power asymmetries
Marxism
- Tends to downplay the significance of power asymmetries in IR
- Assumes a relatively level playing field where states can engage with one another in a predictable manner
- Not all states have equal capabilities, interests, or influence, thus affecting their ability to cooperate effectively
- Neoliberalism overlooks how powerful states can manipulate institutions to maintain their dominance and how weaker states may feel coerced in their interactions
- Fail to articulate the patterns of exploitation and the influence of hegemonic powers
57
“Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the debate” - Robert Jervis
Weakness - assumption of rationality and fixed preferences
Constructivism / postcolonial
- Often relies on the assumption that states are rational actors with fixed preferences
- This simplifies the motivations behind state behaviour and ignores domestic pressures, identity, and social values that influence IR
- Miss the influence of non-material factors, such as ideology, culture, and historical legacies, which can shape state behaviour
- This can lead to misunderstandings in situations where states act against their apparent interests due to nationalism or domestic demands
- Consequently, they may offer insufficient tools for analysing tensions arising from identity politics
