Anarchy Is What It Is Made Up Of: Reappraising Kenneth Waltz’s Grand Concept Through a Marxian Lens

IF 1.8 1区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Shubham Sharma
{"title":"Anarchy Is What It Is Made Up Of: Reappraising Kenneth Waltz’s Grand Concept Through a Marxian Lens","authors":"Shubham Sharma","doi":"10.1177/00208817221137228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I attempt to critically assess Kenneth Waltz’s deployment of the idea of anarchy to erect a ‘scientific theory of international politics’. First, I argue that the formation of a concept requires comprehension of the object from the standpoint of historical development, not a narrow reading of it. Second, I subject the thinner abstractions of self-help, balance of power and bandwagoning to the test of history. Third, I argue about mainstream international relations’ disdain for revolutions. I would posit that revolutions are fine templates which store rich agential history of structural transformation, a theme subject to much chagrin by realists of all hues, particularly neorealists. In doing so, I take the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 as my benchmark. I elucidate that through the occlusion of first and second images, man and state, in the favour of third image, that is, structural anarchy, Waltz tends to ignore the role of agency as a conscious collective which could be best captured by the Bolshevik Revolution. In doing so, I rely on Perry Anderson’s three modes of agency in history. As a corrective to Waltz’s theorization, I make a strong case for class transcending both man and state as an organic category with immense potential of becoming a level of analysis which both acts upon the structure and refracts through it. I finally conclude by saying that anarchy was a condition and not a ‘social relation’ of any sort which could claim to constitute the ‘international’.","PeriodicalId":47002,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Perspectives","volume":"22 1","pages":"336 - 363"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Studies Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208817221137228","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, I attempt to critically assess Kenneth Waltz’s deployment of the idea of anarchy to erect a ‘scientific theory of international politics’. First, I argue that the formation of a concept requires comprehension of the object from the standpoint of historical development, not a narrow reading of it. Second, I subject the thinner abstractions of self-help, balance of power and bandwagoning to the test of history. Third, I argue about mainstream international relations’ disdain for revolutions. I would posit that revolutions are fine templates which store rich agential history of structural transformation, a theme subject to much chagrin by realists of all hues, particularly neorealists. In doing so, I take the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 as my benchmark. I elucidate that through the occlusion of first and second images, man and state, in the favour of third image, that is, structural anarchy, Waltz tends to ignore the role of agency as a conscious collective which could be best captured by the Bolshevik Revolution. In doing so, I rely on Perry Anderson’s three modes of agency in history. As a corrective to Waltz’s theorization, I make a strong case for class transcending both man and state as an organic category with immense potential of becoming a level of analysis which both acts upon the structure and refracts through it. I finally conclude by saying that anarchy was a condition and not a ‘social relation’ of any sort which could claim to constitute the ‘international’.
无政府是由什么组成的:从马克思主义的视角重新评价肯尼斯·瓦尔兹的大概念
在这篇文章中,我试图批判性地评价肯尼斯·瓦尔兹对无政府主义思想的运用,以建立一种“国际政治的科学理论”。首先,我认为,一个概念的形成需要从历史发展的角度来理解这个对象,而不是狭隘地解读它。其次,我将自助、权力平衡和随波逐流等较为抽象的概念置于历史的检验之下。第三,我论述了主流国际关系对革命的蔑视。我认为,革命是很好的模板,它存储了丰富的结构转型代理历史,这是一个让各种现实主义者,尤其是新现实主义者感到懊恼的主题。在这样做的时候,我把1917年的布尔什维克革命作为我的基准。我要说明的是,通过第一和第二意象——人与国家——的闭塞,瓦尔兹倾向于忽视作为一个有意识的集体的能动者的角色,这一角色可以被布尔什维克革命最好地捕捉到。在这样做的过程中,我依赖于佩里·安德森在历史上的三种代理模式。作为对华尔兹理论的纠正,我提出了一个强有力的例子,即阶级超越了人和国家,作为一个有机范畴,具有巨大的潜力,可以成为一种既作用于结构又通过结构折射的分析水平。我最后总结说,无政府状态是一种状态,而不是任何一种可以声称构成“国际”的“社会关系”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Studies Perspectives
International Studies Perspectives INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: International Studies Perspectives (ISP) publishes peer-reviewed articles that bridge the interests of researchers, teachers, and practitioners working within any and all subfields of international studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信