DOCSLIB.ORG

Remarks on the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace Author(S): Spencer R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Remarks on the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace Author(S): Spencer R Remarks on the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace Author(s): Spencer R. Weart Source: Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 38, No. 5 (Sep., 2001), pp. 609-613 Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/424778 . Accessed: 10/03/2011 14:37 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sageltd. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Peace Research. http://www.jstor.org ? 2001 Journal PeaceResearch, )r^^^^Q^M of vol. 38, no. 5, 2001, pp. 609-613 SagePublications (London, Thousand Oaks, CAand New Delhi) [0022-3433(200109)38:5;609-613; 019471] Remarks on the Ancient Evidence for Democratic Peace SPENCER R. WEART Center for History of Physics, American Institute of Physics Responding to Eric Robinson, it is argued that evidence from ancient Greece is inadequate to provide reliable counter-examplesto the democratic peace proposition, provided that the proposition is cor- rectly defined. For the best-documented case, the Athenian invasion of Syracuse,the preponderanceof evidence does make Syracusea well-establisheddemocracy like Athens. But there is contradictoryevi- dence not addressed by Robinson. More important, it is arguable that the decisionmaking body in Athens (the majority of the assembly) did not perceive Syracuseas behaving like a fellow democracy. That is what matters, according to an explanation of the democratic peace based not on institutional or normative causes but on the decisionmakers'perception of a shareddemocratic political culture. In more modern cases where such ambiguities can be checked against primary evidence, the proposition that this sharedperception prevents war holds almost without exception. Other ancient cases cited by Robinson, including all those tabulated by Bruce Russett and William Antholis, involve either (1) regimes even less likely to have perceivedeach other as democracies,or (2) conflicts that apparently fell below the level of 200 combat deaths, which is a thresholdfor violence between democracies.Finally, Robinson fails to addressthe theoreticallycrucial finding that peace has also held with high consistency between oligarchic republics, from ancient times to the present. Evidence on Syracuse with Robinson'simpressive case for a demo- cratic Syracuse. Yet the case is far from What can we learnabout war and democracy certain, for all evidence from the period is from the history of ancient Greece? As flimsy. Robinson (2001) understands,the surviving Consider a single passage in Thucydides informationis so limited that at most we may (6.32-41), which Robinson has not men- find hints that could modify arguments tioned, although a significant fraction of the based on more modern evidence. Robinson historians' debate has revolved around it. It has attempted just that, moving the dis- is no firsthandaccount, but a literaryrecon- cussion forward usefully. However, he has struction based on unknown sources missed some key points. (perhaps Thucydides' notes of talks with Discussions of the democratic peace in Spartans who recalled what they were told ancient Greece have mostly focussed, as by Syracusans?).Weak as it is, this passageis Robinson does, on the search for counter- the best, indeed the only, surviving descrip- examples and particularlythe single case of tion of political activity in Syracuse at the the Athenian expedition against Syracuse. time of interest. The passage summarizes a Historians have long debated whether Syra- session in the assembly of Syracuse after cuse should be classifiedas a 'democracy'in rumors arrived of Athenian plans for an the Athenian sense, and most would agree invasion. A democratic faction argued that 609 610 journal of PEACE RESEARCH volume38 / number5 / september2001 no military preparations were needed, for plistic view of democracy,which there might the Athenians were friendly. Apparently be enough ancient evidence to support. open debate:score one point for democracy. The debate ended without any vote, and Perceptions and Peace Syracuse'sgenerals went ahead on their own authority to make military preparations. I have arguedthat neithertype of explanation Apparent control by an elite: score one for the democraticpeace is valid.A more reli- point for oligarchy. The other passages able explanationlooks to the political culture known to historians, all far briefer, add of leaders,by which I mean their accustomed points for one side or the other, most but practicesas shaped by both institutions and not all for democracy. norms. Democratic leaders climb to power Robinson makes clear that using these and stay there through negotiation and sources (Diodorus Siculus, for example) puts accommodationwith their peers, ratherthan us in the position of someone trying to by forcing one another into exile, jail, or understand 12th-century English politics death. When such leadersare in conflict with using a 16th-century condensed history of foreign counterparts,they follow the normal the world, known to be unreliable.The pit- human conservatism,well known to cogni- falls become visible by comparison with tive, behavioral, and social psychologists: study of more modern cases. In respected they attempt first to solve the problem in secondaryhistories I have found mentions of their accustomed way, namely, peaceful severalearly modern conflicts that sound like negotiation. Violence enters only when they counter-examples,but here one could inspect confront foreign leaderswhom they believe detailed primarysources. This closer inspec- do not themselves adhere to this political tion consistently finds that in the particular culture. year when the war broke out, the democracy In my book Never at War (Weart, 1998, of one side or the other was very new and hereinafterNAW) I do not assertthat democ- scarcelyestablished (less than four yearsold), racies have never made war on their own or else it had just that year fallen under some kind. I assertthat leadersof well-established kind of autocratic or elite-junta control. democracieshave never made war on leaders Thus, a touch of historiographicalmodesty they perceived as their own kind, that is, might curb confidence that the Athenianwar sharing their culture of political behavior. against Syracuseis a sure counter-exampleto The distinction holds high significance for the propositionthat 'well-establisheddemoc- understandingthe causesof wars.A largepart raciesdo not make war on one another'. of NAW is given to studying how leaders But is the validity of that bald proposition decide whether the foreignersthey confront the central question?Yes, accordingto some can be dealt with as fellow-democrats.The explanations of the democratic peace. key is always whether a foreign regime Perhaps democratic executives don't go to appearsto be forciblysuppressing its domes- war because they are constrainedby fear the tic democratic opponents. In a few border- public will vote them out of office, or because line cases where the other regime'sdomestic legislaturesdrag their feet, or for some other behavior was ambiguous, a democracy did institutionalcause. Or perhaps democracies indeed attackwhat some objective observers don'tgo to war becauseordinary folks or their might call a fellow democracy. chosen leaders despise bloodshed, or some Did the Atheniansperceive the Syracusan similar normativecause. In either case, the regime as behaving democratically? proposition standsor fallsaccording to a sim- Emotionally, the Athenians were motivated Spencer R. Weart REMARKS ON ANCIENT EVIDENCE 611 partlyby learninghow their allies, the demo- Greek history. This oligarchic restraintalso cratsof Leontini, had been brutallyrepressed prevailed in periods where the historical by the regime of Syracusein collusion with documentation is far better. The pattern of Leontini's oligarchic elite (Thucydides 5.4, peace between similar republicanregimes - 6.6, 6.19). In more practicalterms, there is but only between similarones, for there have good evidence that the Athenians believed been many dreadfulwars between democra- they would be welcomed and aided by a cies and oligarchies- undercuts both insti- democratic faction within Syracuse itself. tutional and normative explanations of the Indeed without that hope the invasionwould democratic peace, but leaves the political have been entirelyfoolish, for invadersrarely culture explanationstanding. got through the walls of a Greek city unless Robinson has also missed the key point
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and Its Importance for Modem Democracy
    DEMOCRAC AHMOKPATI The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and its Importance for Modern Democracy Mogens Herman Hansen The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and its Importance for Modem Democracy B y M ogens H erman H ansen Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser 93 Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Copenhagen 2005 Abstract The two studies printed here investigate to what extent there is a con­ nection between ancient and modem democracy. The first study treats the tradition of ancient Greek democracy, especially the tradition of Athenian democracy from ca. 1750 to the present day. It is argued that in ideology there is a remarkable resemblance between the Athenian democracy in the Classical period and the modem liberal democracy in the 19th and 20th centuries. On the other hand no direct tradition con­ nects modem liberal democracy with its ancient ancestor. Not one single Athenian institution has been copied by a modem democracy, and it is only from ca. 1850 onwards that the ideals cherished by the Athenian democrats were referred to approvingly by modem cham­ pions of democracy. It is in fact the IT technology and its potential for a return to a more direct form of democracy which has given rise to a hitherto unmatched interest in the Athenian democratic institutions. This is the topic of the second study in which it is argued that the focus of the contemporary interest is on the Athenian system of sortition and rotation rather than on the popular assembly. Contents The Tradition of Democracy from Antiquity to the Present Time .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of War and Peace
    1 THEORIES OF WAR AND PEACE POLI SCI 631 Rutgers University Fall 2018 Jack S. Levy [email protected] http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/ Office Hours: Hickman Hall #304, Tuesday after class and by appointment "War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life or death; the road to survival or ruin. It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied." Sun Tzu, The Art of War In this seminar we undertake a comprehensive review of the theoretical and empirical literature on interstate war, focusing primarily on the causes of war and the conditions of peace but giving some attention to the conduct and termination of war. We emphasize research in political science but include some coverage of work in other disciplines. We examine the leading theories, their key causal variables, the paths or mechanisms through which those variables lead to war or to peace, and the degree of empirical support for various theories. Our survey includes research utilizing a variety of methodological approaches: qualitative, quantitative, experimental, formal, and experimental. Our primary focus, however, is on the logical coherence and analytic limitations of the theories and the kinds of research designs that might be useful in testing them. The seminar is designed primarily for graduate students who want to understand – and ultimately contribute to – the theoretical and empirical literature in political science on war, peace, and security. Students with different interests and students from other departments can also benefit from the seminar and are also welcome. Ideally, members of the seminar will have some familiarity with basic issues in international relations theory, philosophy of science, research design, and statistical methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Postcolonial Theory and Law: a Critical Introduction
    Alpana Roy* POSTCOLONIAL THEORY AND LAW: A CRITICAL INTRODUCTION ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to encourage legal scholars to engage more actively with postcolonial discourse. To this end, the article will outline key concepts in postcolonial theory — such as colonialism, imperialism, decolonisation and neo-colonialism, and will also trace the work of major theorists in this area — Frantz Fanon, Homi Bhabha, Gayatri Spivak, and Edward Said. As this article presents itself as a contribution to the study of postcolonial theory and the law, it will focus on contemporary developments in Australian law reform. Specifically, the article will discuss the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia’s Final Report on Aboriginal Customary Laws. I INTRODUCTION hile conversations between law and postcolonialism have been ‘infrequent’1 and remain largely unmapped, postcolonial discourse is now the major methodological tool with which to trace the patterns of epistemological and pedagogic reterritorialisation of the Wnon-Western w orld. With respect to legal discourse, Peter Fitzpatrick and Eve Darian-Smith suggest that ‘postcolonialism is now the main mode in which the West’s relation to its “other” is critically explored, and law has been…[in] the forefront of that very relation’.2 Nevertheless, while postcolonial theory’s status as a discipline may arguably be more established in other academic areas, it is increasingly being recognised by legal scholars as a methodological tool with which to scrutinise the nature of legal discourse.3 * Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney. I would like to note my sincere thanks to Jenni Millbank for all of her constructive comments on various drafts of this article.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Democracy Create World Peace? Democratic Peace Theory: Misguided Policy Or Panacea
    Can Democracy Create World Peace? Democratic Peace Theory: Misguided Policy or Panacea Alynna Lyon Department of Political Science an democracy create world peace? The idea that Democratic Peace and Political Science representative liberal governments can dimin- In the 1970s, scholars began using the tools of social ish the occurrence of war is one of the most science to explore this thesis and have uncovered a Cappealing, influential, and at the same time, contro- significant amount of empirical research that supports versial ideas of our time. For centuries, thinkers have these claims. Today there are over a hundred authors proposed that a world of democratic countries would who have published scholarly works on the Democratic be a peaceful world. As early as 1795, Immanuel Kant Peace Theory. One study examined 416 country-to- wrote in his essay Perpetual Peace that democracies country wars from 1816-1980 and found that only 12 are less warlike. Within the United States, this idea has were fought between democracies.3 Bruce Russett writes held particular sway. Presidents like Woodrow Wilson that “Established democracies fought no wars against have embraced this idea and advocated the creation of one another during the entire twentieth century.”4 democracies to create a less belligerent world. Harry S. Another proponent found that that the probability of Truman once said, “Totalitarian regimes imposed on any two democracies engaging in war is less than half free peoples…undermine the foundation of internation- of 1%!5 This is not to say that democracies have not gone al peace and hence security of the United States.”1 to war, but when considering pairs (or dyads) of democ- The Democratic Peace Theory is based on several racies, there are almost no instances of war between premises.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy and Deterrence Foundations for an Enduring World Peace
    Democracy and Deterrence Foundations for an Enduring World Peace DR. WALTER GARY SHARP SR. Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama May 2008 Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center Cataloging Data Sharp, Walter Gary. Democracy and deterrence : foundations for an enduring world peace / Walter Gary Sharp, Sr. p. ; cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-58566-180-0 1. Deterrence (Strategy) 2. Democracy. 3. War—Prevention. I. Title. 327.172—dc22 Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. Air University Press 131 West Shumacher Avenue Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-5962 http://aupress.maxwell.af.mil ii Dedicated to my loving wife Anne Marie Sharp from whom all good in my life flows Contents Chapter Page DISCLAIMER . ii DEDICATION . iii FOREWORD . ix ABOUT THE AUTHOR . xi PREFACE . xiii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . xv 1 LIBERAL DEMOCRACY AND ITS GLOBAL INFLUENCE . 1 Features of a Liberal Democracy . 2 Global Political Trends . 7 Notes . 17 2 CONVENTIONAL THEORIES OF WAR AND WAR AVOIDANCE . 19 Conventional Thinking on the Cause of War . 21 Conventional Approaches to War Avoidance . 24 Deterrence as a Tool of War Avoidance . 31 The Law of Conflict Management . 35 The Future of Armed Conflict . 38 Notes . 40 3 THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE PRINCIPLE . 45 The Early Debate . 45 Contemporary Studies and Methodologies . 49 Explanations for the Democratic Peace Principle . 63 Challenges and Alternate Rationales .
    [Show full text]
  • The Social Market Roots of Democratic Peace the Social Market Michael Mousseau Roots of Democratic Peace
    The Social Market Roots of Democratic Peace The Social Market Michael Mousseau Roots of Democratic Peace One of the most im- portant achievements in the study of international security has been the arrival and broad acceptance of the “democratic peace,” that is, the statistically signiªcant absence of war between democracies. This discovery has produced a broader acceptance of domestic factors in the study of international conºict. It has also inºuenced public policy: since the early 1990s, U.S. policymakers have widely embraced democracy as a cause of peace. The extent to which scholars and practitioners can be convinced that democ- racy causes peace, however, depends on how conªdent they are in explaining it. Numerous studies have identiªed democracy as a cause of democratic peace, but none have yielded much meaningful, clear-cut, and nontrivial pre- dictive power—achievements that lie at the heart of scientiªcally identifying causality. On the contrary, it appears increasingly likely that existing explana- tions for how democracy causes peace may be incomplete. Several studies have shown that the impact of democracy on peace may depend on the level of economic development.1 No compelling challenges to these ªndings have been offered, and some scholars who once conªrmed the democratic peace now acknowledge the role played by economic conditionality.2 It follows that Michael Mousseau is Associate Professor of International Relations at Koç University in Istanbul, Turkey. The author wishes to thank Selim Erdem Aytaç, Michael Bernhard, John Drabble, Demet Yalçin & Mousseau, Bruce Russett, Richard Sherman, Nail Tanriöven, Insan Tunali, John Vasquez, Quhnaz Yilmaz, and the anonymous reviewers, all of whom identiªed areas for improvement.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of War and Peace
    1 THEORIES OF WAR AND PEACE POLSGR8832 Jack S. Levy Columbia University Fall 2018 [email protected] [email protected] http://fas-polisci.rutgers.edu/levy/ Office Hours: Fridays 12-2pm IAB, and by appointment "War is a matter of vital importance to the State; the province of life or death; the road to survival or ruin. It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied." Sun Tzu, The Art of War In this seminar we undertake a comprehensive review of the theoretical and empirical literature on interstate war, focusing primarily on the causes of war and the conditions of peace but giving some attention to the conduct and termination of war. We emphasize research in political science but include some coverage of work in other disciplines. We examine the leading theories, their key causal variables, the paths or mechanisms through which those variables lead to war or to peace, and the degree of empirical support for various theories. Our survey includes research utilizing a variety of methodological approaches: qualitative, quantitative, experimental, formal, and experimental. Our primary focus, however, is on the logical coherence and analytic limitations of the theories and the kinds of research designs that might be useful in testing them. The seminar is designed primarily for graduate students who want to understand – and ultimately contribute to – the theoretical and empirical literature in political science on war, peace, and security. Students with different interests and students from other disciplines can also benefit from the seminar and contribute to it, and are also welcome. Ideally, members of the seminar will have some familiarity with basic issues in international relations theory, philosophy of science, research design, and statistical methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    Ari stophanes 'A charnians: Pursuing Peace with an Iambic Peitho Eleni Panagiotarakou A Thesis In the Special Individualized Program Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Concordia Univeristy Montreal, Quebec, Canada May 2009 © Eleni Panagiotarakou Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 OttawaONK1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-63382-3 Our Tile Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-63382-3 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extra its substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Rome Compiled Background Guide Final Online
    Roman Republic (1849) MUNUC 33 ONLINE1 Roman Republic (1849) | MUNUC 33 Online TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ CHAIR LETTER……………………………….………………………….……..…3 CRISIS DIRECTOR LETTER……………………………………………………….5 ANCIENT ROME………………………………………………………………….7 MODERN CONTEXT OF ROME AND THE PAPAL STATES…………………..22 CURRENT ISSUES………………………………………………………………. 36 MAP…………………………………………………………………………….. 39 CHARACTER BIOGRAPHIES…………………………………………………. 40 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………...59 2 Roman Republic (1849) | MUNUC 33 Online CHAIR LETTER ____________________________________________________ Dear Delegates, Welcome to the Roman Republic of 1849! I will be your chair for the weekend of MUNUC, during which time I’ll represent Giuseppe Mazzini. I’m incredibly excited to welcome you to a little-known (and less understood) time in history! The Roman Republic of 1849 represents how people tried to bring ideals of individuality, freedom, and equality to reality. Although the real-world Republic fell to a French invasion, I hope that you can gather your creativity, knowledge, and collaboration to change history and build a Republic that will last. I’m a current senior at the University of Chicago, studying Biology with a specialization in Endocrinology on the pre-medical track. I staff MUNUC, run our collegiate conference ChoMUN as Director-General, and compete on our travel team. Outside of MUN, I do research in a genetic neurobiology lab with fruit flies, volunteer at the UChicago Hospital, and TA for courses such as Organic Chemistry, Genetics, and Core Biology. I also like to write poetry, paint, and perform Shakespeare! If at any point you want to share something or ask a question, on anything from your favorite novel to college life, just reach out to me at [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • The World-Wide Spread of Democracy in the Modern Age - Daniel M
    WORLD SYSTEM HISTORY – Democratization: The World-Wide Spread of Democracy in the Modern Age - Daniel M. Green DEMOCRATIZATION: THE WORLD-WIDE SPREAD OF DEMOCRACY IN THE MODERN AGE Daniel M. Green Department of Political Science and International Relations, University of Delaware, USA Keywords: Democracy, Liberalism, Republicanism, Liberal Movements, Revolutions, Post-Cold War Moment. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Early European Republicanism, to 1517 3. Early Modern Democracy, 1517-1814 3.1. The Dutch, the English, and Liberal Advantage, 1562-1609 3.2. English Events, 1642-1689: Civil War and Glorious Revolution 3.3. The Enlightenment, 1715-1776 3.4. The Age of Revolution, 1776-1814 4. Liberalism in Europe, 1814-1848 4.1. The Revolutions of 1830 4.2. The Revolutions of 1848 4.3. Britain as Liberal Power? 4.4. Scientific Racism and the Standard of Civilization: Europe and the World, 1856- 1914 5. Democracy Unbound: Three Liberal Moments, 1919, 1945, 1989 5.1. WWI and Its Moment 5.2. WWII and Its Moment 5.3. The Post-Cold War Moment, 1989-2001? 5.4. Today’s Democratic Challenges 6. Conclusions Bibliography Biographical Sketch 1. Introduction We liveUNESCO today in what is, in historical terms,– EOLSSthe “Golden Age of Democracy.” After explosive growth in the number of democracies in the 1990-1995 periods (from 70 to 114) we now find ourselves in a world with more democratic regimes than ever before. By the late 1990sSAMPLE there were over 120 democratic CHAPTERS countries and, for the first time in history, the majority of the world’s population was living under democratic rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace in Multi-State Systems E Bruce Brooks John V Lombardi University of Massachusetts at Amherst WSWG Note 266 (4 Dec 2002)
    245 Peace in Multi-State Systems E Bruce Brooks John V Lombardi University of Massachusetts at Amherst WSWG Note 266 (4 Dec 2002) Abstract. The multi-state system is a political configuration that recurs in history. Among the better known examples are classical China, classical Greece, pre-Mauryan India, and Renaissance Italy.1 Modern Europe is an important test case for the theory of such systems. Like classical Greece, but unlike classical China or Renaissance Italy, Europe has not coalesced into one state, but has persisted for centuries asasystem.2 These different historical outcomes raise theoretical questions of some interest. We here test against ancient and modern examples one theory of the behavior of states.3 This is the Democratic Peace (DP) theory,4 which holds that democratic states never attack each other, or do so far less often than do nondemocratic states.5 If so, democratic political structure in single states will be a significant predictor of system stability. The DP theory seems to be successful in predicting known outcomes in early China (no democratic states, continual war, unification) and also in early Greece (some democratic states; some war; no unification). We note, however, that the theory fails with modern South America, and conclude that factors other than political structure must be invoked to explain multi-state outcomes, whether ancient or modern. Data. DP theories abound; some proponents emphasize the “liberal” aspect of “democracy.”6 We chose for testing the Polity IV list, which assigns to states a democracy index ranging from -10 to +10, on criteria established by CIDCM.7 1Participants at the 16th WSWG Conference on multi-state systems (22-23 May 2002), considered these four cases plus the classic Maya and Samguk Korea.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sparta and the Athens of Our Age at Daggers Drawn‘: Polities, Perceptions , and Peace
    ”The Sparta and the Athens Of Our Age At Daggers Drawn‘: Polities, Perceptions , and Peace Published in International Politics 41, no. 4 (December 2004): 582-604. Copyright 2004 Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. Matthew Rendall School of Politics, University of Nottingham University Park Nottingham NG7 2RD United Kingdom 44-(0)115-846-6231 [email protected] Abstract: While historically notions of democracy have varied widely, democratic peace theory has generally defined it in procedural terms. This article takes a close look at the Anglo-French confrontation of 1840. I show that while leaders on both sides were prepared to risk war to gain bargaining advantages, only the French left really wanted to fight. Why? By today‘s criteria, Britain was incontestably more democratic, with its monarch‘s powers far more restricted and its suffrage several times as large. Nevertheless, both sides considered France more democratic, with French republicans despising Britain as an aristocratic oligarchy. While Spencer Weart is right to argue that democratic republics may be hostile to oligarchic ones, they will not necessarily define each other according to modern procedural criteria. Instead, they may judge regimes by the broader social structures that shape power relationships and by outcomes, possibly explaining wars or near misses between ”democracies‘. Keywords: Democratic peace, perceptions, oligarchy; Britain; France 1 0ntroduction 1 ”[T]he only states that halloo for hostility in these days are those into which democracy has widely entered,‘ wrote a London Times essayist on 10 October 1840, ”restless France and self-governing America. And thus futile and false is the radical philosophy which pretends that democratic governments are a security against the costs and crimes of war.‘ Democratic peace theorists might well think this was the pot calling the kettle black.
    [Show full text]