TY - JOUR
T1 - Why is there no reactionary international theory?
AU - Mackay, Joseph
AU - Laroche, Christopher David
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) (2018). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Studies Association. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/6/1
Y1 - 2018/6/1
N2 - Why is there no reactionary international theory? International relations has long drawn on a range of traditions in political thought. However, no current, or even recent, major school of international-relations theory embraces reactionary doctrine. This is more surprising than some might assume. Reaction was once common in the field and is now increasingly common in world politics. In this note, we define reaction and show that no active and influential school of international-relations theory falls within its ideological domain. Nonetheless, reactionary ideas once deeply shaped the field. We identify two distinct kinds of reactionary international politics and illustrate them empirically.We argue that the current lack of reactionary international relations undermines the field's ability to make sense both of its own history and of reactionary practice. Finally, we offer some preliminary thoughts about why reactionary ideas hold little sway in contemporary international-relations theory.
AB - Why is there no reactionary international theory? International relations has long drawn on a range of traditions in political thought. However, no current, or even recent, major school of international-relations theory embraces reactionary doctrine. This is more surprising than some might assume. Reaction was once common in the field and is now increasingly common in world politics. In this note, we define reaction and show that no active and influential school of international-relations theory falls within its ideological domain. Nonetheless, reactionary ideas once deeply shaped the field. We identify two distinct kinds of reactionary international politics and illustrate them empirically.We argue that the current lack of reactionary international relations undermines the field's ability to make sense both of its own history and of reactionary practice. Finally, we offer some preliminary thoughts about why reactionary ideas hold little sway in contemporary international-relations theory.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050817919&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/isq/sqx083
DO - 10.1093/isq/sqx083
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85050817919
SN - 0020-8833
VL - 62
SP - 234
EP - 244
JO - International Studies Quarterly
JF - International Studies Quarterly
IS - 2
ER -