Sociology Of International Relations Research Articles

Norbert Elias, The ‘Civilizing Process’ and the Sociology of International Relations

Norbert Elias's sociological analysis of ‘the civilizing process’ — the process by which modern European societies have been pacified over the last five centuries and emotional identification between the inhabitants of each society has increased — has much to contribute to historical–sociological approaches to International Relations. Elias analysed dominant attitudes towards cruelty and suffering in different phases of human history in his study of the civilizing process, his central purpose being to demonstrate the existence of a long-term trend to lower the ‘threshold of repugnance’ against public acts of violence within modern states. His observations about international relations were principally Hobbesian in nature, although Grotian and Kantian themes also permeated his writings. The latter are evident in his reflections on whether cosmopolitan emotions are stronger in the modern era than in earlier epochs. An empirical analysis of dominant global attitudes towards cruelty in world politics and an investigation of levels of emotional identification between different societies can extend Elias's study of the civilizing process. This form of inquiry can also contribute to the development of Martin Wight's pioneering essays on the sociology of states-systems and enlarge the English School's analysis of ‘civility’ and the ‘civilizing process’ in international relations. More broadly, new linkages between historical sociology and International Relations can be developed around an investigation of the dominant responses to cruelty and suffering — and levels of cosmopolitan identification — in different states-systems.

Historical Sociology of International Relations

Part I. Introduction: 1. What's at stake in 'bringing historical sociology back into international relations?' John M. Hobson 2. Historical sociology: back to the future of international relations? Stephen Hobden Part II. Historical Sociologies of International Relations: 3. The two waves of Weberian historical sociology in international relations John M. Hobson 4. Neo-Weberian historical sociology and the question of epochal transformations Randall Collins 5. Globality and historical sociology: state, revolution and war revisited Martin Shaw 6. Historical sociology and constructivism: an estranged past, a federated future? Michael Barnett 7. The idea of history and history with ideas Christian Reus-Smit 8. World system analysis, historical sociology and international relations: the difference a hyphen makes Barry K. Gills 9. Towards a critical sociology of transnational harm Andrew Linklater 10. International systems in world history: remaking the study of international relations Barry Buzan and Richard Little Part III. Conclusion: The Future of Historical Sociology in International Relations: 11. Historical sociology and international relations theory Steve Smith 12. For an international sociology Fred Halliday 13. On the road toward a historicised conception of international sociology John M. Hobson and Stephen Hobden.

Historical Sociology of International Relations. Edited by Stephen Hobden and John M. Hobson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 324p. $70.00 cloth, $25.00 paper

Historical Sociology of International Relations. Edited by Stephen Hobden and John M. Hobson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 324p. $70.00 cloth, $25.00 paper

Review Article: International Relations and World History

Book reviews: Buzan, Barry and Richard Little, International Systems in World History: Remaking the Study of International Relations (reviewed by Martin Hall); Denemark, Robert A., Jonathan Friedman, Barry K. Gills and George Modelski (eds.), World System History: The Social Science of Long Term Change (reviewed by Martin Hall); Hobden Stephen and John Hobson(eds.), Historical Sociology of International Relations (reviewed by Martin Hall)

Historical sociology of international relations

Historical sociology of international relations

Security, Identity, and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. By Bill McSweeney. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 239p. $54.95 cloth, $19.95 paper.

Security, Identity, and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. By Bill McSweeney. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 239p. $54.95 cloth, $19.95 paper.

For a 'second-wave' Weberian historical sociology in international relations: a reply to Halperin and Shaw

(1998). For a 'second-wave' Weberian historical sociology in international relations: a reply to Halperin and Shaw. Review of International Political Economy: Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 354-361.

Shadowboxing: Weberian historical sociology vs state-centric international relations theory

The perception that traditional frameworks used to study international relations have failed to grasp both the nature of international relations and the direction of major trends of change in the international system has stimulated a more searching critique of dominant approaches in the field, a wider appreciation for critical theory, and a renewed interest in history. International relations theorists of all schools now recognize that conventional analytical distinction made between international and domestic levels of analysis obfuscate empirically and theoretically significant interdependencies of interstate and domestic systems. Consequently, there is growing awareness of the need for a broader and more inclusive paradigm - one which can capture these interdependencies and the interacting and evolving systems which are increasingly transforming national systems and international relations. This awareness has helped to blur the boundaries among paradigms and to encourage a more fluid interaction among social science disciplines. This is good news for the field of political science, since many of its traditional concerns (e.g., war and social change) connect with and overlap a number of disciplinary fields. In 'The historical sociology of the state and the state of historical sociology in international relations,' J.M. Hobson joins a growing number of international relations theorists who are calling for a critical sociology of international relations. Disputing the claim that Weberian analysis is 'merely a sociological form of neorealism,' Hobson sets out to present 'a defense of Weberian historical sociology as applied to the study of intemational relations.' His aim is, first, to define a framework for 'multicausal and multi-spatial analyses of complex change' based on principles drawn from Weberian historical sociology; and, second, to apply this framework to three phenomena: the shift to protectionism in late nineteenth century Europe, the link between war and revolution, and international systems change. Hobson's framework, however, is not a set of theoretically-linked propositions but only a collection of analytical positions culled from the

Debate: The 'second wave' of Weberian historical sociology - The historical sociology of the state and the state of historical sociology in international relations

With the current concern to critique neorealism, international relations (IR) theorists are looking to a variety of new perspectives as a way forward. Various authors have taken a specific interest in Weberian historical sociology (WHS), outlined in the works of Michael Mann and others. Nevertheless, there is currently only a rudimentary understanding of the approach within IR, and perhaps even less understanding of how it can be applied to IR. There is also a growing perception that the approach is inherently realist. This article seeks to redress this. It begins by laying out the basic WHS approach by identifying six general principles or traits. Special emphasis is given to recent developments in WHS's theory of state autonomy, which takes the approach beyond neorealism. Having considered how this approach overlaps with the concerns of various IR theorists, notably Linklater, Halliday and others, it proceeds to examine how the approach can take IR beyond neorealism, by applying it to understanding: international economic change through a historical examination of tariff protectionism and free trade; the international politics of states, war and revolution; and international systems change (namely European industrialization). It concludes with a possible historical sociology research agenda for the study of IR.

The Problem of Community in International Relations

This paper is concerned with the problem of community in international relations. It begins with some brief observations about the nature of state-formation in early modern Europe and proceeds to discuss key philosophical, sociological, and practical questions that have become central to the history of international thought. In their different ways, these questions have raised issues of moral inclusion and exclusion. The recurrent philosophical questions have been concerned with whether or not there is any rationale for the state's inclusion of citizens and exclusion of noncitizens from the moral community. The main sociological questions have focused on whether or not the dominant principles of inclusion and exclusion in the international states system are changing. Questions of practice have raised the issue of whether foreign policy ought to be concerned with these principles or with preventing them from changing. Various schools of thought have endeavored to answer one or more of these questions, but no single perspective has answered all three systematically and successfully. This paper sketches the manner in which a critical form of international theory can develop a distinctive approach to the issues raised above and suggests some new directions for critical international relations theory. The argument of this paper is set out in five sections: First is a discussion of the philosophical, sociological, and practical problems that have long been central to international relations theory. The brief section that follows claims that a critical solution to these problems should recover the project begun in different ways by Kant and Marx. With this in mind, the third section considers some criticisms of ethical universalism and suggests how the defense of a universal community can be developed. The fourth section then suggests some new directions for the sociology of international relations. It argues for a sociology of the

The Sociology of International Relations.

The Sociology of International Relations.

The Editorial Discussion about the International Relations Research

In past issues, our magazine has brought several discussion contributions to the issue research on international relations. They were written by well-known UMPE workers, who conduct research into international relations using a mostly historical-political method. In the past years the sociological approach got ahead to individual scientific disciplines. In today's world, sociology has also penetrated into the study of international relations and a council of schools and theories was created. To discuss all these questions and further development of the methodological side of the research of international interest, the editors invited several experts on December 13, 1966 toabove all, they assessed the possibilities of a sociological approach to the study of international relations. Sociologists Assoc. M. Soukup and doc. K. Kára from the CSAV Institute of Sociology, doc. R. Selucký, economist and dramaturg Cs. state film, and doc. from UMPE took part in it. M. Nikl, dr. Placek, doc. V. Sojak, dr. J. Stepanovsky and edited by dr. J. Sedivý, who moderated the discussion, and M. Kovárová. The discussion showed that the sociology of international relations is still in Czechoslovakia in the beginning, it is difficult to decide in which direction to focus the research, which topics to choose for their processed has enriched both social sciences and practical politics, what methods apply, take over and create.

The Sociology of International Relations: A Trend Report and Bibliography

The Sociology of International Relations: A Trend Report and Bibliography

The Scope of A Sociology of International Relations

The Scope of A Sociology of International Relations