The Social construction of the world Flashcards
Socialisation
There are things that exist only because we believe them to exist, they are facts by human agreement - John Searle
There are two type of facts, brute facts and institutional facts.
Brute facts vs institutional facts
Brute facts - Require no human institutions for their existence, a mountain
Institutional facts - They require human institutions for their existence, for example moneys value is not decided by the physical objects, humans give it meaning.
Constructivism
It is a way to deal with the need to understand how things exist due to human interaction.
There is no such thing as pre determined outcomes, socialisation means things change
We have agency and therefore we can help shape reality and therefore as individuals we have political responsibility.
Our agency has limits, it is mediated by interactions norms and rules, it is impossible for someone to do what they want when society is conditioned by so many players.
Constructivism origins
Dominated theories were failing to explain what was happening at the end of the cold war, so academics began to look for a answer.
Alexander Wendt - IR constructivist theory, the world is anarchical if states thus wish.
Adler argues that in terms of a social theory, the world only exists as we interpret it.
Norms
‘Standard of appropriate behaviour’ Finnemore and Sikkink
Different from principles which are passive and law which is less flexible
Life Cycle of norms
Norm emergence, persuasion by entrepreneurs, ‘norm cascade’ is a dynamic of imitation by other states, norm internalization, norms acquire a taken for granted quality.
States do tend to follow norms, until realisation of this the discipline was based heavily on power and resources.
Key princibles
Global politics is guided by intersubjectively, shared ideas, norms and values held by actors.
Structures shape the way actors define themselves, this is socialization
Structures and actors co determine each other
Anarchy only exists in IR because each individual state decides that anarchy exists, states were socialised into believing anarchy exists - Alex Wendt.
Alex Wendt
IR studies the distribution of resources. Why is it that some states treat some states as enemies and some as friends when they have the same amount of resources.
Military tanks, why is it that if the UK has 100 tanks and Russia has 100 tanks there is a different attitude towards each.
This cannot be explained by resources, but social issues, where there are values, interests and identities
The idea we live in a anarchial system cannot on its own explain why states behave differently to each other.
Neo realism vs constructviism
Realists are not wrong, it is just incomplete. Waltz defines the international system with anarchy, we need to look into capabilities and functions of the actors, but Wind plugs in identity as another dimension.
Realists talk about structure, Wendt talks about institutions.
Constructivists on anarchy
Anarchy is a ‘empty vessel’ that cannot deal with IR on its own
Hobbesian order, norms are followed because they are guaranteed by a credible enforcer, logic of enmity.
Lockean order, norms are internalised ‘Rivalry’ and ‘cost calculation’. Logic of rivalry, states act according to norms because they believe its in their best interest.
Kantian order, deepest level of internalisation, fore or cost are determinative. Logic of friendship. They behave in this way because they believe in this. EU for example.
Around the world we find these three things happening and we can apply them to different circumstance.
Identity
Who we are and how we perceive ourself, It helps inform interests in IR, how states perform internationally is informed by how states perceives themselves.
- If you see yourself as a strong state you behave in a specific way, if you see yourself as a democracy you behave in a way.
- Identity does not come from imagination but from interaction. ‘Looking glass’ self, you see someone else but also yourself. Who am i according to this person?
Identity changes
End of consensus of who people are, de naturalization of identity, new practises.
Consensus
When there is a relationship, there is a consensus of who people are. Reagan saw Gorbachev as a communist, and could be expected to act like a communist, no trust. Gradually Reagan realised that Gorbachev was a man no different to himself and wanted to avoid nuclear war
De Naturalization
De naturalization of identity and identification of new possibilities, Reagan and Gorbachev recognised change was coming and they needed to overcome the cold war and therefore they signed a arms agreement.
Critics of Wendt
Identities are not stable, we can be open and democratic when dealing with friends, and a strong state when dealing with enemies.
States are not unitary actors, and therefore there are many identities, many peoples speak on behalf of the state.
