Martin wight, international theory and the good life

Millennium - Journal of International Studies

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 1990, Pages 261-272

  Jackson, Robert H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84970157818     PISSN: 03058298     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/03058298900190020901     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Martin Wight, ‘Why Is There No International Theory?’, in H. Butterfield and M. Wight (eds.), Diplomatic Investigations (London: Allen and Unwin, 1966), p. 33. Wight is referring to classical political thought and so am I.
2. For criticisms of Wight along not dissimilar lines, see Roy Jones, ‘The English School of International Relations: A Case for Closure’, Review offittei-national Studies (Vol. 7, January 1981), pp. 1-10 and Roy Jones, ‘The Myth of the Special Case in International Relations’. Review of international Studies (Vol. 14, October 1988), pp. 268-69. See also N.J. Rengger, ‘Serpents and Doves in Classical International Theory’, Millennium; Journal of International Studies (Vol. 17, No. 2, Summer 1988), pp. 215-18.
3. See, for example, his various essays in Hedley Bull (ed.), Sysfems of States (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1977).
4. These are the ironical words of Michael Donelan. He is critical of the traditional separation of international theory and political theory on the Kantian grounds that ‘there is now a primordial community of mankind’. See Michael Donelan (ed.). The Reason of States (London: Allen and Unwin. 1978), pp. 77, 90-91.
5. See the brief discussion on this issue in Stanley Hoffman, Primacy or World Order (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978), p. 106.
6. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. by Michael Oakeshott (Oxford: Blackwell, 1946), p. 82.
7. Arnold Wolfers, Discord and Callaboration (London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1965), p. 238.
8. See Hedley Bull, ‘Martin Wight and the Theory of International Relations: The Second Martin Wight Memorial Lecture’, British Journal of International Studies (Vol. 2, 1976), pp. 101-16. Wight’s meanings of these terms are used throughout this essay.
9. Cardinal Richelieu, as quoted by Sir Herbert Butterfield, ‘Raison d’Etat: The Relations Between Morality and Government’ (The First Martin Wight Memorial Lecture, University of Sussex, 1975).
10. J. Bodin, Six Books of the Commonwealth, translated by M.J. Tooley (Oxford: Blackwell, 1955), Book One, pp. 1-6.
11. Gerhard Ritter, Frederick the Great, translated by Peter Paret (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1968), p. 70.
12. J.H. Herz, ‘Rise and Demise of the Territorial State’, World Politic’s (Vol. 9, 1957), pp. 473-93.
13. See the excellent discussion of Bentham’s intemational theory in Nancy L. Rosenblum, Bentham’s Theory of the Modern State (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978). These quotations are from Chapter 5.
14. R.J. Vincent, Human Rights and Inlernational Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 123-25.
15. M. Wight, ‘An Anatomy of International Thought’. Review of International Studies (Vol. 13, 1987), pp. 225-26.
16. Immanuel Kant, ‘Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose’ and ‘Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch’, both reprinted in Hans Reiss (ed.), Kant’s Political Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), pp. 47 and 104.
17. Wight, op.cit., in note 1, pp. 24-26.
18. Wight, op. rir, in note 26, p. 227.
19. I refer to Hegel’s famous remark that ‘the owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of the dusk’. T.M. Knox (translator and ed.). Hegel’s Philosophy of Right (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952), p. 13.