ID Concepts Flashcards
Self-fulfilling vs. self-destructive prophesy
Prediction that directly or indirectly causes itself to become true due to positive feedback. This may sufficiently influence people so that their reactions ultimately fulfill the once-false prophecy.
Prediction that prevents what it predicts from happening (prophetis dilemma). Result of rebellion to the prediction.
Prophecy of negative outcome is made and that negative outcome is achieved through a positive feedback = fulfilling.
Negative outcome is made but outcome is positive because of negative feedback = destructive
Materialism vs. idealism *
Materialism and Idealism – Two Basic Perspectives in the Social Sciences
Materialism
⇒ human society is best understood by focusing on its material foundations, particularly economic aspects. How people survive and earn their living influence how they relate to other people, and how and what they think
Idealism (Idealism A)
⇒ human society is best understood by focusing on ideas that guide individuals and society as a whole. What people think and believe is the key to understanding how they live, and how they relate to other people.
Cf. a different usage of the term “idealism” (Idealism B)
Idealism may also refer to the optimistic belief that high-minded ideals (such as world peace and justice) can be actually realized. The antonym of “idealism B” is not materialism, but rather realism (or cynicism / pessimism, depending on your viewpoint). The two definitions of idealism (A and B) are not unrelated. You cannot have idealism B without some belief in idealism A. Idealism B assumes that ideas can have influence on the reality, which is exactly what idealism A says. But you can be pessimistic about the world while believing in idealism A. So sometimes, idealism A coexists with idealism B, though you can have A without B.
Two Alternative Visions of World History
Materialist view of world history (eg. Adam Smith, Karl Marx)
Key events: Agricultural revolution, Industrial Revolution
Idealist view of world history (eg. Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel)
Key events: The rise of “world religions,” the Scientific Revolution(17C)
Basis and superstructure (in Marxism) *
Productive forces and class relations are the “basis” of history which shapes its superstructure (i.e., things like politics, ideology, arts, literature, etc.). The development of human societies may be periodized into four or five stages, depending on the levels of productive forces, and the class relations and superstructure that correspond to them
Slave morality vs. master morality (in Nietzsche’s ideas) *
Master morality: “the strong have the natural right to dominate”
The strong have nothing to fear, so they can afford to express their “will to power” in a straightforward way, as a healthy instinct to rule over others. Master morality does not care about equal rights, etc., but the strong can be magnanimous out of their sense of superiority.
Slave morality: “blessed are the weak, for they shall inherit the world” The weak also have will to power, but they fear being punished by the strong, or being unable to realize their wish. Hence, the weak express their will to power in a roundabout way, by condemning pursuit of power as sinful, arrogant, etc. Yet in condemning pursuit of power, the weak are not above “power struggle.” Rather, they simply substitute subtle psychological aggression to physical ones. “We have been oppressed”; “we are above pursuing power,” they claim; but at a deep psychological level, they simply wish to replace the power elite (which they cannot join) with a new, moral elite like themselves. (eg. Christianity, socialism, feminism)
Both master morality and slave morality are equally based on will to power; hence there is no fundamental moral distinction between the two. However, Nietzsche’s main concern was to expose the “slavish” character of Christian morals which dominated Europe of his day, and to recapture some of the glories of ancient Greece, which he saw as an example of a society based more on master morality. Hence his criticism was more biting on the “slave morality.”
Legitimacy *
In any large-scale political system, there are rulers, the administrative staff, and the ruled. Political systems are unstable if people follow the rulers only because of intimidation or material incentives. Political systems are stable only if the system (and the rulers) enjoy a degree of “legitimacy.” Legitimacy refers to the belief on the part of the ruled (and the administrative staff) that it is right (or just) for them to follow the order of the rulers.
Empire vs. states system *
Empires are ruled centrally by an emperor who claims geographically / culturally unbounded legitimacy based often on some “universal” doctrines
Close (though not necessary) linkage between world religions and empires – universal doctrines of world religions helped integrate far-flung empires inhabited by diverse population
Political System of Multiple Sovereign States –International Law before WWI
Fundamental norm – equality and independence (self-determination) of sovereign states
non-intervention in the “domestic” affairs of other states (parallel with the principle in Roman law: “the law stops at the door of the house”);
no single, overarching concept of justice to regulate the system (international law as “private law” rather than “public law” ) or central government to enforce agreements. Compensations for damages must be secured not by appeal to higher authorities, but by means of self-help.
Tributary trade
The Imperial tributary system shaped foreign policy and trade for over 2,000 years of Imperial China’s economic and cultural dominance of the region, and thus played a huge role in the History of Asia, and the History of East Asia in particular.
Peace of Westphalia *
In that interpretation, the story of Westphalia is a historical myth created by IR scholars who wanted to create a foundational basis in history for their realist or international society theories. The revisionists argue that there is no solid basis in the historical evidence for the traditional claim that the modern, post-medieval system or soci- ety of states emerged out of the Peace of Westphalia and successive episodes, such as the Congress of Vienna (1815) or the Peace of Paris (1919).
Sovereign immunity *
the principle of sovereign immunities are foreign sovereigns & governments cannot be sued in domestic court for their public actions
Illegalization of warfare
s
Quasi-states * and de facto states
A state that possesses juridical statehood but is severely deficient in actual statehood. A large number of states in the developing world can be defined in this way: they are recognized as states and participate in the state system, but they have weak or corrupt political institutions, underdeveloped economies, and little or no national unity.
The de facto state is a secessionist entity that receives popular support and has achieved sufficient capacity to provide governmental services to a given population in a defined territorial area, over which it maintains effective control for an extended period of time.
State of nature *
Hobbes said, “During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in fear, they are in that condition which is called Warre. In such condition, the life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
The “State of Nature” among individuals is a state of “war of every man against every man”
Security dilemma *
even though military power is necessary to obtain some security in the dangerous word of IR, building up military power may not guarantee security, either, because it may incite an arms race that leaves everyone no better off either in terms of security or in terms of finance.
Balancing vs. bandwagoning *
A) Balance of Power Theory: The traditional and most influential realist theory within realism has been the theory of balance of power, which consists of the following propositions:
1) States should avoid being dominated by other powers; they should prevent the emergence of a hegemonic state by pursuing a policy of balancing (either internal balancing or external balancing) vis-à-vis (potentially) dominant states. States remain on friendly terms with each other as long as they are allied against an external enemy / rival, but their relations tend to sour when the enemy weakens or disappears.
B) Hegemony Theory: The balance of power theory has been challenged by other group of realists who believe in the theory of hegemony, which consists of the following propositions:
1’) Great powers are often capable of balancing against rival great powers, including potential hegemons. However, balancing is sometimes costly and unrealistic, especially for small powers. Those states are advised to engage in “buck-passing” or sometimes even “bandwagoning.”
Mutual assured destruction (MAD) *
This condition, in which nuclear war leads to the complete destruction of both states regardless of who first uses nuclear weapons
