自然状态与作为公司的国家:重新评估结构现实主义的华尔兹类比

IF 1.5 3区社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

International Relations Pub Date : 2022-11-26 DOI:10.1177/00471178221140086

Zhichao Tong

{"title":"自然状态与作为公司的国家:重新评估结构现实主义的华尔兹类比","authors":"Zhichao Tong","doi":"10.1177/00471178221140086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines one often overlooked aspect of Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Politics: the analogy he makes between firms and states. Specifically, I contrast this ‘states as firms’ analogy adopted by Waltz with the state of nature analogy that has often been attributed to him. I make three separate but interrelated claims: (1) the state of nature analogy is not only different from the states as firms analogy, but may also be an inappropriate one for structural realism in the sense that it fails to account for some of the theory’s key theses; (2) the states as firms analogy helps us to better understand, if not to fully embrace, how Waltz arrives at certain central premises of his theory; and (3) the states as firms analogy provides a more comprehensive account of dynamic effects of the international system, including the transformation of state attributes that would have been neglected by those who subscribe to the state of nature analogy.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State of nature versus states as firms: reassessing the Waltzian analogy of structural realism\",\"authors\":\"Zhichao Tong\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00471178221140086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines one often overlooked aspect of Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Politics: the analogy he makes between firms and states. Specifically, I contrast this ‘states as firms’ analogy adopted by Waltz with the state of nature analogy that has often been attributed to him. I make three separate but interrelated claims: (1) the state of nature analogy is not only different from the states as firms analogy, but may also be an inappropriate one for structural realism in the sense that it fails to account for some of the theory’s key theses; (2) the states as firms analogy helps us to better understand, if not to fully embrace, how Waltz arrives at certain central premises of his theory; and (3) the states as firms analogy provides a more comprehensive account of dynamic effects of the international system, including the transformation of state attributes that would have been neglected by those who subscribe to the state of nature analogy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Relations\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178221140086\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178221140086","RegionNum":3,"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

摘要

本文考察了肯尼斯·瓦尔兹国际政治理论中一个经常被忽视的方面:他将公司与国家进行了类比。具体地说，我将华尔兹采用的“作为公司的国家”类比与通常归因于他的自然状态类比进行了对比。我提出了三个独立但相互关联的主张:(1)自然状态类比不仅不同于作为企业的状态类比，而且可能不适合结构现实主义，因为它未能解释理论的一些关键论点;(2)国家作为企业的类比有助于我们更好地理解(如果不能完全接受的话)华尔兹是如何得出他的理论的某些中心前提的;(3)国家作为企业的类比对国际体系的动态效应提供了更全面的解释，包括那些赞同自然状态类比的人可能会忽略的国家属性的转变。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

State of nature versus states as firms: reassessing the Waltzian analogy of structural realism

This paper examines one often overlooked aspect of Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Politics: the analogy he makes between firms and states. Specifically, I contrast this ‘states as firms’ analogy adopted by Waltz with the state of nature analogy that has often been attributed to him. I make three separate but interrelated claims: (1) the state of nature analogy is not only different from the states as firms analogy, but may also be an inappropriate one for structural realism in the sense that it fails to account for some of the theory’s key theses; (2) the states as firms analogy helps us to better understand, if not to fully embrace, how Waltz arrives at certain central premises of his theory; and (3) the states as firms analogy provides a more comprehensive account of dynamic effects of the international system, including the transformation of state attributes that would have been neglected by those who subscribe to the state of nature analogy.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

International Relations INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-

CiteScore

3.20

自引率

6.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： International Relations is explicitly pluralist in outlook. Editorial policy favours variety in both subject-matter and method, at a time when so many academic journals are increasingly specialised in scope, and sectarian in approach. We welcome articles or proposals from all perspectives and on all subjects pertaining to international relations: law, economics, ethics, strategy, philosophy, culture, environment, and so on, in addition to more mainstream conceptual work and policy analysis. We believe that such pluralism is in great demand by the academic and policy communities and the interested public.