Between Science and Art: Questionable International Relations Theories

Japanese Journal of Political Science

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 191-208

  Wang, Yiwei ^a  

^a FUDAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650060270     PISSN: 14681099     EISSN: 14740060     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1468109907002629     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Stephen M. Walt, ‘International Relations: One World, Many Theories’, Foreign Policy (Spring 1998), 30.
2. Wang Yiwei and Ni Shixiong, ‘The Balance of Power and International Order: Rethinking in the post-Cold War Era’, World Economy and Politics, 2 (2001).
3. World Economy and Politics.
4. See Hans Morgenthau, Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York: Knopf, 1967).
5. See Kenneth Waltz, The Theory of International Politics (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979).
6. See Robert Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984).
7. Alexander Wendt, ‘Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics’, International Organization, 46 (1992): 391–425.
8. Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics(Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 246–312.
9. Joseph S. Nye, ‘Take Case for Deep Engagement’, Foreign Affairs (July/Auggest, 1995).
10. John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001), pp. 260–261. Also see 355.
11. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, p. 24.
12. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, pp. 26–27.
13. Bruce Russet, H. Starr, and D. Kinsella, World Politics: A Menu for Choice (New York: St. Martin's, 2000), p. 13.
14. Bueno de Masquita, ‘Domestics and International Relations’, ISA President Address (24 March 2002).
15. Wang Yizhou, ‘Several Problems in IR Studies in China’, Proving the International Political Theories in China (Shanghai People's Publishing House, 1998), pp. 13–14.
16. Bruce Russett and John Oneal, Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001), Preface.
17. Martin Wight, ‘Why is there no international theory’, in H. Butterfield and M. Wight (eds), Diplomatic Investigation: Essays in the Theory of International Politics (London: Allen & Unwin, 1966), pp. 17–34.
18. Robert Cox, ‘Social Force, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory’, in Robert Keohane (ed.), Neorealism and Its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), pp. 204–254.
19. Kjell Goldmann, ‘International Relations: An Overview’, in Robert E. Goodin and Hans-Dieter Klingemann (eds), A New Handbook of Political Science (Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 407.
20. See my Ph.D. dissertation ‘The Strategy, Theorem and Idea of Balance of Power: Historical Indications and Theoretical Dilemma’.
21. Karl Marx: ‘The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte’.
22. Hedley Bull, ‘The Theory of International Politics, 1919–1969’, in James Der Derian (ed.), International Theory: Critical Investigations (New York: New York University Press, 1995), pp. 208–209.
23. See Joseph S. Nye, Jr., The Paradox of American Power: Why the World only Superpower Can't Go It Alone (Oxford University Press, 2002), passim.
24. Also see Song Xinning, ‘Building International Relations Theory with Chinese Characteristics’, Journal of Contemporary China, 10(26) (2001).
25. Stanley Hoffmann, ‘An American Social Science: International Relations (1977)’, Daedalus, 106 (3) (Summer): 41–60.
26. Ido Oren, Our Enemies and US: America's Rivalries and the Making of Political Science (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003).
27. Martin Griffiths, Realism, Idealism and International Politics: A Reinterpretation (London and New York: Routledge, 1992), Preface.
28. Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics.
29. Alexander Wendt, Preface of the Chinese edition of Social Theory of International Politics (Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2000).
30. Mao Zedong, ‘Analysis of Chinese Different Classes’, Selected Work of Mao Zedong I: 3.
31. Scott Burchill and Andrew Linklater, Theories of International Relations (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1996), p. 24.
32. Ni Shixiong, Contemporary West International Relations Theories (Shanghai: Fudan University Press, 2001), p. 235.
33. Ole Wæver, ‘The Sociology of a Not So International Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations’, International Organization, 52 (4) (1998): 696.
34. Zhao Tingyang: Tianxia System (All under Heaven): Introduction of the Philosophy of World Institutions, Nanjing, Jiangshu Higher Education Publishing House, 2005, p. 13
35. Zhao, Tingyang, ‘Rethinking Empire from a Chinese Concept “All-under-Heaven”’ (Tianxia, $). Social Identities, 12 (1) (2006): 29–41; A Framework of Political Philosophy in terms of All-under-heaven/Zhao, Tingyang 05–10–15.
36. The original figure sees Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge University Press, 1999) 32.
37. Ye Zhicheng, ‘Self-rule, Order and Harmony: Hypothesis on Laozi's High Means of Anarchy’, International Politics Studies, 1 (2002).