Pluralism, Solidarism and the Emergence of World Society in English School Theory

International Relations

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 19-38

  Williams, John ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

change; diversity; globalisation; territorial borders; Westphalian system

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248034201     PISSN: 00471178     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0047117805050060     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Barry Buzan, ‘The English School: An Underexploited Resource in IR’, Review of International Studies, 27(3), 2001, p.482.
2. Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (London: Macmillan, 1977), p.13.
3. Richard Little, ‘The English School's Contribution to the Study of International Relations’, European Journal of International Relations, 6(3), 2000, pp.395–422.
4. Bull, Anarchical Society, p.153.
5. Bull, Anarchical Society, pp.233–81.
6. Bull, Anarchical Society, pp.286–8, 292, 294–5.
7. Bull, Anarchical Society, pp.286–8, 292, 294–5, 316–17.
8. Martin Wight (edited by Gabrielle Wight and Brian Porter), International Theory: The Three Traditions (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991).
9. Bull, Anarchical Society.
10. Hedley Bull, ‘The Concept of Justice in International Relations’, in Hedley Bull, Justice in International Relations: The Hagey Lectures (Waterloo: University of Waterloo Press, 1984).
11. João Marques de Almeida, ‘Challenging Realism by Returning to History: the British Committee's Contribution to IR 40 Years On’, International Relations, 17(3), 2003, pp.273–302.
12. Almeida, ‘Challenging Realism’, p.296.
13. Ana Gonzalez-Palaez and Barry Buzan, ‘A Viable Project of Solidarism? The Neglected Contribution of John Vincent's Basic Rights Initiative’, International Relations, 17(3), 2003, pp.321–40.
14. Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization: A Critical Introduction (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2000).
15. John Agnew and Stuart Corbridge, Mastering Space: Hegemony, Territory and Political Economy (London: Routledge, 1995).
16. Michael Shapiro and Hayward Alker (eds), Challenging Boundaries: Global Flows, Territorial Identities (Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 1996).
17. Bull, Anarchical Society, p.10.
18. David L. Blaney and Naeem Inayatullah, ‘The Westphalian Deferral’, International Studies Review, 2(2), 2000, pp.29–64.
19. Onora O'Neill, ‘Justice and Boundaries’, in Chris Brown (ed.), Political Re-structuring in Europe: Ethical Perspectives (London: Routledge, 1994).
20. Onora O'Neill, ‘Permeable Boundaries and Multiple Identities’, in Preston King (ed.), Socialism and the Common Good: New Fabian Essays (London: Frank Cass, 1996).
21. Bull, ‘Concept of Justice’; Robert H. Jackson, The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
22. James Mayall, Nationalism and International Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991).
23. R. J. Vincent, Human Rights and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).
24. Nicholas J. Wheeler, Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
25. Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations for a Post-Westphalian Age (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998).
26. Bull, Anarchical Society, p.23.
27. Bull, Anarchical Society, pp.233–81.
28. Bull, Anarchical Society, pp.286–8, 292, 294–5.
29. Bull, Anarchical Society, pp.268–8, 292, 294–5, 316–17.
30. Jackson, Global Covenant.
31. Jackson, Global Covenant, pp.249–93, 400–25.
32. Agnew and Corbridge, Mastering Space.
33. Hidemi Suganami, ‘British Institutionalists, or the English School, 20 Years On’, International Relations, 17(3), 2003, pp.262–3.
34. Hedley Bull, ‘The State's Positive Role in International Relations’, Daedalus, 108(4), 1979, pp.111–24.
35. Bull, ‘Concept of Justice’.
36. Jackson, Global Covenant discuss pluralism almost entirely in terms of states.
37. Martin Wight, System of States (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1977), chapter 6.
38. Blaney and Inayatullah, ‘Westphalian Deferral’.
39. Christian Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining Society: Constructivism and the English School’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 4(3), 2002, pp.502–5.
40. Little, ‘English School's Contribution’.
41. Mayall, Nationalism.
42. Alan James, The Bases of International Order (London: Oxford University Press, 1973).
43. Tim Dunne and Nicholas J. Wheeler, ‘Hedley Bull's Pluralism of the Intellect and Solidarism of the Will’, International Affairs, 72(1), 1996, pp.91–107.
44. Dunne and Wheeler, ‘Hedley Bull's Pluralism’, Nicholas J. Wheeler, ‘Pluralist or Solidarist Conceptions of International Society: Bull and Vincent on Humanitarian Intervention’, Millennium, 21(3), 1992, pp.463–87.
45. Wheeler, Saving Strangers.
46. Bull, ‘Concept of Justice’. Contrast Bull's thinking at this time with John Vincent's appeal to the possibility of solidarism, see Human Rights.
47. Gonzalez-Palaez and Buzan, ‘A Viable Project of Solidarism?’
48. Ian Clark, ‘Another “Double Movement”: The Great Transformation after the Cold War?’, Review of International Studies, 27(Special Issue), 2001, pp.237–56.
49. State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect (Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, 2001).
50. ICISS, Responsibility to Protect, offers an interesting example of the impact on practitioners of international politics of these debates. See, in particular, the discussion of sovereignty, pp.7–8.
51. John Tomlinson, Globalization and Culture (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999).
52. ICISS, Responsibility to Protect, pp.5–7.
53. Timothy Dunne, ‘The Social Construction of International Society’, European Journal of International Relations, 1(3), 1995, pp.367–89.
54. Buzan, ‘The English School’. For a critique of the limited engagement of the English School with constructivism.
55. Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining Society’, pp.489–92.
56. Adam Watson, The Evolution of International Society (London: Routledge, 1992).
57. Hedley Bull and Adam Watson (eds), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984).
58. Wheeler, Saving Strangers.
59. Linklater, Transformation of Political Community.
60. Clark, ‘Double Movement’, pp.250–3.
61. Tim Dunne, ‘Society and Hierarchy in International Relations’, International Relations, 17(3), 2003, pp.303–20.
62. ‘The Global Covenant’ in Millennium, 31(2), 2002.
63. Bull, Anarchical Society, section 2.
64. Susan Strange, ‘The Westfailure System’, Review of International Studies, 25(3), 1999, pp.345–54.
65. Scholte's, Globalization, p.48.
66. Bull, Anarchical Society, pp.16–17.
67. Blaney and Inayatullah, ‘Westphalian Deferral’, pp.44–54.
68. ICISS, Responsibility to Protect.
69. Global Covenant, pp.185–370, especially 216–93 and 316–35.
70. Iver B. Neumann, ‘The English School on Diplomacy: Scholarly Promise Unfulfilled’, International Relations, 17(3), 2003, pp.341–70.
71. Global Covenant, pp.400–26.
72. John Williams, ‘Territorial Borders, Toleration and the English School’, Review of International Studies, 28(4), 2002, pp.737–58.
73. John Williams, ‘The Borders of Ethics and the Ethics of Borders: International Society and Rights and Duties of Special Beneficence’, Global Society, 13(4), 1999, pp.467–87.
74. Scholte, Globalization, p.59.
75. Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), p.8.
76. David Held, Democracy and the Global Order (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995), part III.
77. Chris Brown, ‘Cosmopolitanism, World Citizenship and Global Civil Society’, in Simon Caney and Peter Jones (eds), Human Rights and Global Diversity (London: Frank Cass, 2001).
78. Linklater, Transformation of Political Community.
79. David Newman and Anssi Paasi, ‘Fences and Neighbours in the Postmodern World: Boundary Narratives in Political Geography’, Progress in Human Geography, 22(2), 1998, pp.186–207.
80. Hastings Donnan and Thomas M. Wilson, Borders: Frontiers of Identity, Nation and State (Oxford: Berg, 1999), p.4.
81. Herbert Dittgen, ‘The End of the Nation State?’ in Martin Pratt and Janet Allison Brown (eds), Borderlands Under Stress (London: Kluwer Law International, 2000), p.53.
82. Peter Mandaville, ‘Reading the State from Elsewhere: Towards an Anthropology of the Postnational’, Review of International Studies, 28(1), 2002, pp.199–207.
83. Mayall, Nationalism and International Society.
84. I am grateful to Barry Buzan for suggesting this argument which he develops in From International to World Society? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
85. Bull, Anarchical Society, p.5.
86. Clark, ‘Double Movement’, p.254.
87. Hannah Arendt, Human Condition.
88. Williams, ‘Territorial Borders’.
89. John Williams, ‘Hannah Arendt and the International Space In-Between’, in Anthony F. Lang, Jr. and John Williams (eds), Hannah Arendt and International Relations (New York: Palgrave, forthcoming).
90. Chris Brown, ‘International Theory and International Society: The Viability of the “Middle Way”’, Review of International Studies, 21(2), 1995, pp.183–96.