International Relations Theory: Competing Empirical Paradigms

320 Pages·2016·3.281 MB·English

by  Michael Haas

International Relations
Theory

International Relations
Theory
Competing Empirical Paradigms
Michael Haas
LEXINGTON BOOKS
Lanham • Boulder • New York • London
Published by Lexington Books
An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706
www.rowman.com
Unit A, Whitacre Mews, 26-34 Stannary Street, London SE11 4AB
Copyright © 2017 by Lexington Books
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any
electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems,
without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote
passages in a review.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available
Library of Congress Control Number
Name: Haas, Michael, 1938- author.
Title: International relations theory : competing empirical paradigms / Michael Haas.
Description: Lanham, Maryland : Lexington Books, [2016] | Includes bibliographical
references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016043064 (print) | LCCN 2016046489 (ebook) |
ISBN 9781498544993 (cloth : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781498545006 (Electronic)
Subjects: LCSH: International relations—Philosophy.
Classification: LCC JZ1305 .H33 2016 (print) | LCC JZ1305 (ebook) |
DDC 327.101—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016043064
∞ ™ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library
Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.
Printed in the United States of America
iv
Contents
Tables and Figures vii
Preface ix
PART I: HISTORY OF THE DISCIPLINE OF
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES 1
1 The Beginning of the Field: An Intellectual History 3
2 The Great Masquerade: Waltzing to Theoretical Oblivion 19
PART II: EXPLICATING PARADIGMS OF
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 33
3 The Need for Paradigm Development 35
4 Marxian Paradigm 51
5 Mass Society Paradigm 59
6 Community Building Paradigm 81
7 Rational Choice Paradigm 117
8 Other International Studies Paradigms 153
PART III: THE FUTURE OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES 197
9 Neobehavioral International Studies 199
References 207
Index 273
About the Author 307
v

List of Tables and Figures
TABLES
Table 3.1 Theories of Metaphysics 45
Table 6.1 Types of Social Movements 83
Table 8.1 Decision-Making Parameters 155
Table 8.2 Sociological Perspectives 168
FIGURES
Figure 4.1 The Basic Marxian Paradigm 52
Figure 4.2 Expansion of the Marxian Paradigm 54
Figure 5.1 Original Mass Society Paradigm 62
Figure 5.2 Kornhauser’s Basic Mass Society Paradigm 64
Figure 5.3 Kornhauser’s Extended Mass Society Paradigm 65
Figure 5.4 Mass Society Social Unrest Paradigm 67
Figure 5.5 Mass Society Development Paradigm 68
Figure 5.6 Mass Society International Violence Paradigm 73
Figure 6.1 Community Mobilization Paradigm 84
Figure 6.2 Stages of Community Building Paradigm 85
Figure 6.3 Protest Mobilization Paradigm 86
Figure 6.4 Social Transaction Paradigm 92
Figure 6.5 Functional Paradigm 94
Figure 6.6 Neofunctional Paradigm 96
Figure 6.7 Political Unification Paradigm 101
Figure 6.8 Regime-Building Paradigm 106
Figure 6.9 Communitarian Community Building Paradigm 112
Figure 7.1 Classical Economics Rationality Paradigm 119
Figure 7.2 Cost-Benefit Rationality Paradigm 121
Figure 7.3 Social Darwinian Rationality Paradigm 124
vii
viii List of Tables and Figures
Figure 7.4 Pressure Group Rationality Paradigm 131
Figure 7.5 Hegemonic Rationality Paradigm 134
Figure 7.6 Balance-of-Power Rationality Paradigm 137
Figure 7.7 Deterrence Rationality Paradigm 140
Figure 7.8 Selectorate Rationality Paradigm 141
Figure 7.9 Voting Rationality Paradigm 145
Figure 7.10 Social Exchange Rationality Paradigm 147
Figure 7.11 Resource Mobilization Rationality Paradigm 148
Preface
In 2015, I attended a panel “Reviving International Relations Theory” at the
annual convention of the Midwest Political Science Association. One paper,
which was evidently assigned by the panel chair, discussed Social Darwin-
ism as a possible theory but concluded that there was nothing in the ideology
that could become a theory of international relations. In a discussion from
the floor, I read a list of paradigms, presented herein, which included Social
Darwinism. I also recited a history of the International Studies Association
(ISA), which had become dominated by scholars on the East Coast who had
been trying to advise Washington with their research and op-eds. The paper
presenter responded that he had difficulty with the word “paradigm.” The
panel chair solicited an essay from me of a certain word length, so I reviewed
current textbooks and other writing on international relations theory. I was
shocked that the word “theory” was equated with “ideology” and that the
literature had completely lost track of empirical paradigms. Although I then
prepared my essay, which was emailed to him, I never heard from him again.
Subsequently, I submitted that essay, focusing on the history of ISA, dem-
onstrating how paradigm development has been overlooked, for publication
to two international studies journals. They both rejected the essay primarily
because they felt that the point that “theory” was being used to describe
ideology was too trivial to warrant publication. In other words, they ignored
the intellectual history presented and the enumeration of paradigms in the
field that had been forgotten. One reviewer even failed to see the difference
between mid-level theory and paradigms, which are clusters of mid-level the-
ories. The other read no farther than the title. I have quoted their comments in
Chapter 2 along with those of a former ISA president, who reflected that there
has been a decline in scholarship within the field of international studies.
ix