DOCSLIB.ORG

420581 1 En Bookbackmatter 143..143 ++

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
420581 1 En Bookbackmatter 143..143 ++ BIBLIOGRAPHY Alker, Hayward, and Thomas Biersteker. 1984. The Dialectics of World Order: Notes for a Future Archeologist of International Savoir Faire. International Studies Quarterly 28 (2): 121–142. Al-Tamimi, Naser. 2013. China–Saudi Arabia Relations, 1990–2012: Marriage of Convenience or Strategic Alliance? New York: Routledge. Altheide, David. 2006. Terrorism and the Politics of Fear. Oxford: Altamira. Aron, Raymond. 1966. Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Art, Robert, and Robert Jervis. 2013. Kenneth Waltz and His Legacy: The Man and the State of War. Foreign Affairs. Available from http://www.foreign affairs.com/articles/139400/robert-art-and-robert-jervis/kenneth-waltz- and-his-legacy. Accessed 26 March 2014. Ashley, Richard. 1986. The Poverty of Neorealism. In Neorealism and Its Critics, ed. Robert Keohane, 255–300. New York: Columbia University Press. Axelrod, Robert, and Robert Keohane. 1985. Achieving Cooperation Under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions. World Politics 38 (1): 226–254. Ayoob, Mohammed. 2002. Inequality and Theorizing in International Relations: The Case for Subaltern Realism. International Studies Review 4 (3): 27–48. Barkin, Samuel. 2010. Realist Constructivism: Rethinking International Relations Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press. Bleiker, Roland, and Emma Hutchison. 2008. Fear No More: Emotions and World Politics. Review of International Studies 34 (Supplement S1): 115–135. Blight, James. 1992. The Shattered Crystal Ball: Fear and Learning in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. Blight, James, Bruce Allyn, and David Welch. 2002. Cuba on the Brink: Castro, the Missile Crisis, and the Soviet Collapse. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. © The Author(s) 2017 143 A.H. Pashakhanlou, Realism and Fear in International Relations, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-41012-8 144 BIBLIOGRAPHY Booth, Ken, ed. 2011. Realism and World Politics. New York: Routledge. Booth, Ken, and Nicholas Wheeler. 2008. The Security Dilemma: Fear, Cooperation and Trust in World Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brauch, Hans Günter. 2003. Security and Environment in the Mediterranean: Conceptualising Security and Environmental Conflicts. New York: Springer. Brooks, Stephen. 1997. Dueling Realisms. International Organization 51 (3): 445–477. Brooks, Stephen, and William Wohlforth. 2008. World Out of Balance: International Relations and the Challenge of American Primacy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Brosschot, Jos, William Gerin, and Julian Thayer. 2006. The Perseverative Cognition Hypothesis: A Review of Worry, Prolonged Stress-Related Physiological Activation, and Health. Journal of Psychosomatic Research 60 (2): 113–124. Brown, Chris. 1997. Understanding International Relations. London: Macmillan. Brown, Chris. 2012. Tragedy, ‘Tragic Choices’ and Contemporary International Political Theory. In Tragedy and International Relations, eds. Toni Erskine and Richard Ned Lebow, 75–85. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brzezinski, Zbigniew, and John Mearsheimer. 2005. Clash of the Titans. Foreign Policy 146 (47): 1–6. Butterfield, Herbert. 1951. History and Human Relations. London: Collins. Buzan, Barry. 1995. The Level of Analysis Problem in International Relations Reconsidered. In International Relations Theory Today, eds. Ken Booth and Steve Smith, 198–216. Cambridge: Polity. Buzan, Barry. 1996. The Timeless Wisdom of Realism? In International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, eds. Steve Smith, Ken Booth, and Marysia Zalewski, 47–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Buzan, Barry, Charles Jones, and Richard Little. 1993. The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism. New York: Columbia University Press. Campbell, David. 1998. Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Carr, E. H. 1939. The Twenty Year’s Crisis, 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations. London: Macmillan. Caverley, Jonathan. 2013. Neoconservativism, Neoclassical Realism, and the Narcissism of Small Differences. In After Liberalism? The Future of Liberalism in International Relations, eds. Rebekka Friedman, Kevork Oskanian, and Ramon Pacheco Pardo, 145–166. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Cheung-Blunden, Violet, and Bill Blunden. 2008. The Emotional Construal of War: Anger, Fear, and Other Negative Emotions. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 14 (2): 123–149. Chomsky, Noam, Hans Morgenthau, and Michael Walzer. 1978. Vietnam and Cambodia. Dissent 25 (4): 386–390. BIBLIOGRAPHY 145 Christensen, Thomas. 1999. China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia. International Security 23 (4): 49–80. Clore, Gerald, and Karen Gasper. 2000. Feeling Is Believing: Some Affective Influences on Belief. In Emotions and Beliefs: How Feelings Influence Thoughts, eds. Nico Frijda, Antony Manstead, and Sacha Bem, 10–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Coget, Jean-Francois, Christophe Haag, and Donald Gibson. 2011. Anger and Fear in Decision-Making: The Case of Film Directors on Set. European Management Journal 29 (6): 476–490. Copeland, Dale. 2000. The Origins of Major War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Cozette, Murielle. 2008. Reclaiming the Critical Dimension of Realism: Hans J. Morgenthau on the Ethics of Scholarship. Review of International Studies 34 (1): 5–27. Craig, Campbell. 2004. American Realism versus American Imperialism. World Politics 57 (1): 143–171. Craig, Campbell. 2007. Glimmer of a New Leviathan: Total War in the Realism of Niebuhr, Morgenthau, and Waltz. New York: Columbia University Press. Crawford, Neta. 2000. The Passion of World Politics: Propositions on Emotion and Emotional Relationships. International Security 24 (4): 116–156. Crawford, Neta. 2009. Human Nature and World Politics: Rethinking ‘Man’. International Relations 23 (2): 271–288. Damasio, Antonio. 1994. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. New York: Putnam. Davis, Carmel. 2011. Power, Threat, or Military Capabilities: US Balancing in the Later Cold War, 1970–1982. Plymouth: University Press of America. Dienstag, Joshua. 2008. Pessimistic Realism and Realistic Pessimism. In Political Thought and International Relations: Variations on a Realist Theme, ed. Duncan Bell, 159–176. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dierauer, Isabelle. 2013. Disequilibrium, Polarization, and Crisis Model: An International Relations Theory Explaining Conflict. Plymouth: University Press of America. Donnelly, Jack. 2000. Realism and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dumont, Muriel, Vincent Yzerbyt, Daniël Wigboldus, and Ernestine Gordijn. 2003. Social Categorization and Fear Reactions to the September 11th Terrorist Attacks. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29 (12): 1509–1520. Elman, Colin. 2004. Extending Offensive Realism: The Louisiana Purchase and America’s Rise to Regional Hegemony. American Political Science Review 98 (4): 563–576. Elster, Jon. 1999. Alchemies of the Mind: Rationality and the Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 146 BIBLIOGRAPHY Engel, Ulf, and Gorm Rye Olsen. 2005. Global Politics and Africa – and Africa in International Relations Theory. In Africa and the North: Between Globalization and Marginalization, eds. Ulf Engel and Gorm Rye Olsen, 1–19. New York: Routledge. Enloe, Cynthia. 2000. Maneuvers: The International Politics of Militarizing Women’s Lives. Berkely: University of California Press. Evrigenis, Ioannis. 2007. Fear of Enemies and Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fein, Steven, and James Hilton. 1994. Judging Others in the Shadow of Suspicion. Motivation and Emotion 18 (2): 167–198. Fettweis, Christopher. 2010. Dangerous Times? The International Politics of Great Power Peace. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Finnegan, Richard. 1972. The Field of International Relations: The View from Within’. Towson State Journal of International Affairs 7: 1–24. Fischer, Agneta, and Antony Manstead. 2010. Social Functions and Emotion. In Handbook of Emotions, eds. Michael Lewis, Jeannette Haviland-Jones, and Lisa Feldman Barrett, 456–470. New York: Guilford. Frei, Christoph. 2001. Hans J. Morgenthau: An Intellectual Biography. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Freyberg-Inan, Annette. 2004. What Moves Man: The Realist Theory of International Relations and Its Judgment of Human Nature. Albany: SUNY. Gallarotti, Giulio. 2010. Cosmopolitan Power in International Relations: A Synthesis of Realism, Neoliberalism, and Constructivism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Geunwook Lee, Gerald. 2002. To be Long or not to be Long—That is the Question: The Contradiction of Time-Horizon in Offensive Realism. Security Studies 12 (2): 196–217. Gilpin, Robert. 2011. Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Glaser, Charles. 1994. Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-Help. International Security 19 (3): 50–90. Glaser, Charles. 1996. Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-Help. In Realism: Restatements and Renewal, ed. Benjamin Frankel, 122–166. London: Frank Cass. Glaser, Charles. 1997. The Security Dilemma Revisited. World Politics 50 (1): 171–201. Glaser, Charles. 2010. Rational Theory of International Politics: The Logic of Competition and Cooperation. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Goldstein, Joshua. 2001. War and Gender: How Gender Shapes the War System and Vice Versa. Cambridge: Cambridge
Load more

Recommended publications
  • US Racial Politics II New Deal to the Present
    U.S. Racial Politics: New Deal to the Present Political Science 449/549 CRN: 37625 Professor: Joseph Lowndes Office: PLC 919 email: [email protected] Graduate Employee: Course description: In this course, we will examine the ways that race shaped the major political dynamics in the United States from the Great Depression to the present. Materials: There are two books for this course, available in the bookstore. The books are The Unsteady March, by Philip Klinkner and Rogers Smith; and When Affirmative Action Was White, by Ira Katznelson. PS 5549 will have one additional text: Lowndes, Novkov and Warren, eds. Race and American Political Development. All other readings will be available on Canvas. Requirements for 449: This is a heavy reading course 1. Seven in-class quizzes. These quizzes will assess your comprehension of the assigned reading, lectures and class discussions. Your lowest two scores will be dropped. No make-up quizzes are possible. (50% of final grade) 2. Midterm in-class exam (25% of final grade) 3. Final exam (25% of final grade) 4. Participation: Students will be expected to attend class and participate in class discussions. Constructive, informed, respectful participation that contributes directly to conversations about the course material will raise borderline grades; lack of participation may result in lower grades. Requirements for 549: Research paper 18-20 pages, due Wednesday of Finals Week. Meet with me by 4th week with thesis topic to discuss. Policies: Students with disabilities. If you have a documented disability and anticipate needing accommodations in this course, please make arrangements to meet with the professor soon.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to American Political Culture
    Bellevue College INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN POLITICAL CULTURE Political Science 160/Cultural & Ethnic Studies 160 Item 5361 A (POLS 160) or 5638 (CES 160) (Five Credits)1 Winter 2011 (Jan. 3-March 22), 11:30 a.m.-12:20 p.m. (L-221) Dr. T. M. Tate (425) 564-2169 [email protected] Office: D-200C Office Hours: See MyBC course site Pre-requisite: None Course Description This course treats the ways in which American cultural patterns influence and shape political outcomes and public policy. Study of the political culture may shed light on the nature of the political struggles and on the policy process in general. Political outcomes in the United States are not random but are structured and connected by certain enduring values. We seek answers to questions such as: How do Americans thinks about government, political institutions, social welfare, and the market? What are the origins and sources of American political culture? How has it changed over time, and what factors account for this change? How is American political culture distinctive, and how is it being reshaped in a time of globalization? In the process of this broad inquiry, we necessarily treat concepts such as democracy, liberty, individualism, American “exceptionalism,” political community, and political culture itself. Learning Outcomes On completion of this course, you should be able to: Explain the concept of political culture and its relevance to contemporary political society. 1 One credit hour of this course is online via MyBC. Identify the core values in American political culture and understand their influences on political life. Demonstrate how the political culture influences and shapes American politics and the policy process.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizenship Denationalized (The State of Citizenship Symposium)
    Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies Volume 7 Issue 2 Article 2 Spring 2000 Citizenship Denationalized (The State of Citizenship Symposium) Linda Bosniak Rutgers Law School-Camden Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijgls Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Bosniak, Linda (2000) "Citizenship Denationalized (The State of Citizenship Symposium)," Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies: Vol. 7 : Iss. 2 , Article 2. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijgls/vol7/iss2/2 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Citizenship Denationalized LINDA BOSNIAK° INTRODUCTION When Martha Nussbaum declared herself a "citizen of the world" in a recent essay, the response by two dozen prominent intellectuals was overwhelmingly critical.' Nussbaum's respondents had a variety of complaints, but central among them was the charge that the very notion of world citizenship is incoherent. For citizenship requires a formal governing polity, her critics asserted, and clearly no such institution exists at the world level. Short of the establishment of interplanetary relations, a world government is unlikely to take form anytime soon. A good thing too, they added, since such a regime would surely be a tyrannical nightmare.2 * Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School-Camden; B.A., Wesleyan University; M.A., University of California, Berkeley; J.D., Stanford University.
    [Show full text]
  • John J. Mearsheimer: an Offensive Realist Between Geopolitics and Power
    John J. Mearsheimer: an offensive realist between geopolitics and power Peter Toft Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, Østerfarimagsgade 5, DK 1019 Copenhagen K, Denmark. E-mail: [email protected] With a number of controversial publications behind him and not least his book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, John J. Mearsheimer has firmly established himself as one of the leading contributors to the realist tradition in the study of international relations since Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Politics. Mearsheimer’s main innovation is his theory of ‘offensive realism’ that seeks to re-formulate Kenneth Waltz’s structural realist theory to explain from a struc- tural point of departure the sheer amount of international aggression, which may be hard to reconcile with Waltz’s more defensive realism. In this article, I focus on whether Mearsheimer succeeds in this endeavour. I argue that, despite certain weaknesses, Mearsheimer’s theoretical and empirical work represents an important addition to Waltz’s theory. Mearsheimer’s workis remarkablyclear and consistent and provides compelling answers to why, tragically, aggressive state strategies are a rational answer to life in the international system. Furthermore, Mearsheimer makes important additions to structural alliance theory and offers new important insights into the role of power and geography in world politics. Journal of International Relations and Development (2005) 8, 381–408. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jird.1800065 Keywords: great power politics; international security; John J. Mearsheimer; offensive realism; realism; security studies Introduction Dangerous security competition will inevitably re-emerge in post-Cold War Europe and Asia.1 International institutions cannot produce peace.
    [Show full text]
  • 271 Sorensen
    Copyright © British International Studies Association 1998 IR theory after the Cold War GEORG SØRENSEN The end of the Cold War has prompted a good deal of soul-searching in the academic discipline of International Relations (IR).* Some results of this process are already apparent; the dominant version of realism, neorealism, is developing in new directions in an attempt to address major areas where the theory has been shown to contain weaknesses (e.g. domestic politics, international cooperation, the analysis of change).1 Liberal IR-theory is becoming less focused on international institutions and has devoted more attention to the larger issues of democracy and democratization, sovereignty, and change in the context of modernization and globalization.2 Some bodies of established theory are receiving fresh attention, including the International Society (or English) School,3 and there is a renewed interest in the field of international political economy.4 Yet all these theoretical traditions (realism, liberalism, International Society, international political economy) can be seen as enduring perspectives in IR; they build on a long intellectual tradition concerning problems of relations between * Many thanks to Kenneth Glarbo, Knud Erik Jørgensen, Michael Nicholson, Steve Smith, and Alexander Wendt for very helpful comments on earlier drafts. 1 See, for example, Joseph M. Grieco, ‘Realist International Theory and the Study of World Politics’, in M.W. Doyle and G.J. Ikenberry (eds.), New Thinking in International Relations Theory (Boulder, 1997), pp. 163–202; Michael E. Brown et al. (eds.), The Perils of Anarchy. Contemporary Realism and International Security (Cambridge, MA, 1995); John A. Vasquez, ‘The Realist Paradigm and Degenerative versus Progressive Research Programs: An Appraisal of Neotraditional Research on Waltz’s Balancing Proposition’, and the responses by Kenneth Waltz, Thomas Christensen, and Jack Snyder, Colin and Miriam Fendius Elman, Randall Schweller and Stephen Walt, American Political Science Review, 4 (1997), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • US Democracy Promotion in the Middle East
    The London School of Economics and Political Science US Democracy Promotion in the Middle East The Pursuit of Hegemony? Dionysius Markakis A thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, October 2012 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 86.627 words. 1 Abstract The promotion of ‘democracy’ abroad has been a feature of US foreign policy since the earlier part of the twentieth century, accompanying its rise as an international actor. It provided the ideological basis for its opposition to rivals in the form of imperialism, fascism and then communism. The end of the Cold War, which signalled the emergence of the US as the sole superpower, accelerated this process. With the ideological fusion of democracy and capitalism credited in large measure for the defeat of communism and the state-planned economy, the promotion of democracy alongside capitalism as the only viable, legitimate mode of governance emerged as an increasingly important component of US foreign policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Balance of Power
    BALANCE OF POWER BALANCE OF POWER Theory and Practice in the 21st Century Edited by T. V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Fortmann Stanford University Press, Stanford, California 2004 Stanford University Press Stanford, California © 2004 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system without the prior written permission of Stanford University Press. Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, archival-quality paper Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Balance of power : theory and practice in the 21st century / edited by T.V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Fortmann. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8047-5016-5 (cloth : alk. paper)—ISBN 0-8047-5017-3 (pbk : alk. paper) 1. Balance of power. 2. International relations. I. Paul, T.V. II. Wirtz, James J., 1958– III. Fortmann, Michel. JZ1313.B35 2004 327.1'01—dc22 2004011433 Designed by Janet Wood Typeset by BookMatters in 11/14 Garamond Original Printing 2004 Last figure below indicates year of this printing: 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 Contents List of Tables vii Acknowledgments ix About the Editors and Contributors xi Introduction: The Enduring Axioms of Balance of Power Theory and Their Contemporary Relevance T. V. Paul 1 Part I: Theories of Balance of Power and Major Powers 1. What Do Great Powers Balance Against and When? 29 Jack S.
    [Show full text]
  • Soft Balancing Against the United States Soft Balancing Against Robert A
    Soft Balancing against the United States Soft Balancing against Robert A. Pape the United States President George W. Bush and his administration are pursuing a profoundly new U.S. national se- curity strategy. Since January 2001 the United States has unilaterally aban- doned the Kyoto accords on global warming, rejected participation in the International Criminal Court, and withdrawn from the Antiballistic Missile (ABM) treaty, among other unilateralist foreign policies. Although the United States gained considerable international sympathy following the terrorist at- tacks of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration chose to conduct military operations against the Taliban regime in Afghanistan with the aid of only one country: Great Britain.1 In 2002 the administration announced that it would re- place the Baathist regime in Iraq, a country that posed no observable threat to attack the United States, and to do so with military force “unilaterally if neces- sary.”2 The United States went on to conquer Iraq in early 2003 despite vigor- ous efforts by many of the world’s major powers to delay, frustrate, and even undermine war plans and reduce the number of countries that would ªght alongside the United States. Since then, the United States has threatened Iran and Syria, reafªrmed its commitment to build an ambitious ballistic missile defense system, and taken few steps to mend fences with the international community. The Bush strategy is one of the most aggressively unilateral U.S. national se- curity strategies ever, and it is likely to produce important international conse- quences. So far, the debate has focused almost exclusively on the immediate Robert A.
    [Show full text]
  • Solidarity and the Promo
    16 inequality and solidarity iwmpost continued from page 13 cio-economic inequality, the Euro- access to power, or does it take the peans looked to their governments Commemoration agency of the disadvantaged them- and the EU for redistributive poli- Ceremony selves? Katherine Newman’s analysis cies. As Claus Offe remarked: “We of the effects of taxation in the US can legislate standards for clean air; On the first evening of the con- Solidarity and the Promotion of Good Life below the federal level demonstrat- why does it not seem possible to leg- ference, a commemoration ceremony ed how state actions can create, or islate for lower Gini coefficients?” ◁ in memoriam Krzysztof Michalski at least exacerbate, inequality. Alfred 1) OECD: Divided We Stand. Why (1948–2013), founding Rector of Gusenbauer pointed out in his con- Inequality Keeps Rising, 2011. the IWM, took place at the Museum report 2) of Applied Arts Vienna. In his cluding remarks that, furthermore, Congressional Budget Office: Trends in the Distribution of Household Income between memory, Michael Sandel, Anne T. people are much more critical of the 1979 and 2007, 2011. and Robert M. Bass Professor of The economic downturn and the rigorous austerity Government at Harvard University inequalities created by the state than 3) Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate Pickett: and member of the IWM Academic policies that followed the banking and financial crisis of those created by the markets. How- The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better, Bloomsbury Press: Advisory Board, gave a lecture on ever, in their suggested solutions, London, 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • SOC 585: Racial and Ethnic Politics in the US
    Spring 2018 Prof. Andra Gillespie 217E Tarbutton 7-9748 [email protected] Office Hours: Wednesdays 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. (12-2 p.m. the first Wednesdays of the month) or by appointment Emory University Department of Political Science SOC 585/POLS 585 Racial and Ethnic Politics in the US This course is designed to introduce graduate students to some of the canonical readings, both historical and contemporary, in racial and ethnic politics. While African American politics will be a central theme of this course, this course intentionally introduces students to key themes in Latino/a and Asian American politics as well. By the end of the course, students should be conversant in the major themes of racial and ethnic politics in the US. Required Readings The following books have been ordered and are available at the Emory Bookstore: Cathy Cohen. 1999. The Boundaries of Blackness. Michael Dawson. 1994. Behind the Mule. Megan Francis. 2014. Civil Rights and the Making of the Modern American State. Lorrie Frasure-Yokeley. 2015. Racial and Ethnic Politics in American Suburbs. Christian Grose. 2011. Congress in Black and White. Ian Haney-Lopez. 1997, 2007. White By Law. Carol Hardy-Fanta et al. 2016. Contested Transformation: Race, Gender and Political Leadership in 21st Century America. Rawn James. 2013. Root and Branch. Donald Kinder and Lynn Sanders. 1994. Divided by Color. Taeku Lee and Zoltan Hajnal. 2011. Why Americans Don’t Join the Party. Michael Minta. 2011. Oversight. Stella Rouse. 2013. Latinos in the Legislative Process Katherine Tate. 2010. What’s Going On? Katherine Tate.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY of AMERICA the Christian, The
    THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy © Copyright All Rights Reserved By Tapani Kristian Saarinen Washington, D.C. 2016 The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace Tapani Saarinen, Ph.D. Director: Michael Root, Ph.D. The World Council of Churches’ (WCC) Decade to Overcome Violence between 2001-2010 included theological reflection and work to overcome all violence. The results can be read in a document called Ecumenical Call to Just Peace (ECJP). ECJP presents a call to overcome violence and establish Just Peace in four distinct contexts: community, ecology, economy and international politics. As causes of violence differ depending on context, however, can such a holistic approach provide a workable solution for various contexts and their specific challenges? My study focuses on the possible contributions of ECJP’s teaching for the states as actors in international politics. The purpose of my study is to analyze and assess ECJP from the perspective of the causes of war, especially as such causes have been investigated by realist theories of international relations (IR). I transfer the IR approach which unites work for peace and analysis of the causes of war to the study of ecumenical teaching in ECJP.
    [Show full text]
  • Bound to Fail John J. Mearsheimer the Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order
    Bound to Fail Bound to Fail John J. Mearsheimer The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order By 2019, it was clear that the liberal international order was in deep trouble. The tectonic plates that underpin it are shifting, and little can be done to repair and rescue it. Indeed, that order was destined to fail from the start, as it contained the seeds of its own destruction. The fall of the liberal international order horriªes the Western elites who built it and who have beneªted from it in many ways.1 These elites fervently believe that this order was and remains an important force for promoting peace and prosperity around the globe. Many of them blame President Donald Trump for its demise. After all, he expressed contempt for the liberal order when campaigning for president in 2016; and since taking ofªce, he has pur- sued policies that seem designed to tear it down. It would be a mistake, however, to think that the liberal international order is in trouble solely because of Trump’s rhetoric or policies. In fact, more funda- mental problems are at play, which account for why Trump has been able to successfully challenge an order that enjoys almost universal support among the foreign policy elites in the West. The aim of this article is to determine why the liberal world order is in big trouble and to identify the kind of inter- national order that will replace it. I offer three main sets of arguments. First, because states in the modern world are deeply interconnected in a variety of ways, orders are essential for facilitating efªcient and timely interactions.
    [Show full text]