Theorization, Harm, and the Democratic Imperative: Lessons from the Politicization of the Democratic-Peace Thesis

Abstract

The migration of democratic-peace theory from academia to the American political arena resulted in misrepresenting the theory politically. Both the form and content of the political misrepresentation are different from those of the theory. It is argued here that rather, than the theory itself, it is its political misrepresentation that influenced public deliberation and the recent American efforts to democratize the Middle East. Thus, the inputs of theorizing the democratic peace are shown to cause political harms and policy mishaps. Identifying the harms, the mishaps and the theoreticians' indirect responsibilities for them, I conclude that theoreticians are ascribed with political responsi bility ensuing in a democratic imperative to show greater concern and involvement in the political destinies of their theories and to participate more actively in the public deliberations that shape policies. Nowadays, it is not rare to hear international relations (IR) scholars sneering at the democratic-peace thesis and blaming it and its proponents for the Iraq War. And to make matters worse, the problems of the war are taken to be the ultimate theoretical refutation of the thesis and to all practical?and theoretical?intents, democratic-peace theories are now seen by many as defunct. However, although my purpose is not to take sides in the theoretical debate on the validity of the thesis, I can safely argue?to paraphrase Mark Twain?that the reports of the thesis' demise are greatly exaggerated. The point is that this fashionable schol arly sneer has opened the door for a discussion of the theoreticians' responsibili ties for the real-life ramifications of their theories. Two kinds of responsibilities are mainly discussed here: The first is the political responsibility ensuing in a democratic imperative. The second is scholarly responsibility ensuing in a theo retical imperative. For different reasons, each of these responsibilities burden theoreticians with the imperative to show greater concern and involvement in the political destinies of their theories and to participate more actively in the public deliberations that shape policies.2 Although it may be argued that theory can benefit society and policy-making, the way theorization is conducted today causes two forms of political harm. The