International Society — Theoretical Promises Unfulfilled?

Abstract

The English school in the study of international relations is characterized by its interest in `international society', i.e. a society formed by and of states developing rules and institutions for the conduct of their relations. This perspective has held a promise of overcoming the dichotomies of realist-liberalist and historical-structural approaches. Thereby it opened up for potential studies of for instance the relative weight of systemic (structural and constant) pressures relative to historical peculiarities in the evolution of different systems of states; the interplay between international society and a `world society' of mankind; and characterization of the different logics of international relations in different epochs. Reviewing three recent and prominent publications from the `school', it seems that although the books each on their own make valuable contributions to International Relations, development of theory of international society is not a very dynamic business. A plea is made for an opening of the — too English? — school towards parallel American interest in `regimes', towards semioticians' insight into the nature and implications of `sharing language', and towards historically focused studies in classical political theory and international law. In particular, the books on nationalism (James Mayall) and Hugo Grotius (Hedley Bull et al.) offer promising examples of this.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 59 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.