DOCSLIB.ORG

COURSE REQUIREMENTS/EVALUATION: This Course Is a Seminar, and Student Attendance and Participation Are Essential to the Course

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COURSE REQUIREMENTS/EVALUATION: This Course Is a Seminar, and Student Attendance and Participation Are Essential to the Course National Chengchi University Department of Diplomacy Spring 2014 Debates on Globalization Assistant Professor Yeh-chung Lu Course: Thursday 9:10am-12:00pm Office: #270909, North Wing, General Building Classroom: 271112 Office Hours: Thursday 4-6pm or by appointment Email: [email protected] Also designed for International Master’s Program in International Studies (IMPIS) COURSE OBJECTIVES: Globalization has been a trendy word for decades. This graduate/post-graduate level course examines globalization as a phenomenon and explains its various dimensions, including economic, cultural, political, and security focuses. Begin with the development of globalization, this course proposes that economic interdependence constitutes the bedrock of this phenomenon. However, this perspective needs to be supplemented with a focus on global inequality. In addition, cultural and political globalization reveals the differences between civilizations and societies, and the situation is further complicated by the advancement of military technology. International organizations, states, and individuals have changed their roles vis-à-vis other actors in world politics. This course aims to help students to develop their own understanding about and application of the concept of globalization. COURSE REQUIREMENTS/EVALUATION: This course is a seminar, and student attendance and participation are essential to the course. Preparation and discussion are therefore highly encouraged. The composition of evaluation is as follows: 1. Weekly Oral Presentations (20% x 3): Each week one to two students will be responsible for analyzing and critiquing the assigned readings. This presentation should include a 15 minute assessment of the author’s main argument(s), the evidences and sources used, and the principal findings. Each student will be presenting his/her views and leading the discussion for three times in this semester. Prior to his/her presentation, the student is required to submit a 2-3 page essay highlighting the key analytical issues in assigned readings. 2. Team-based Presentation (25%): The class will be divided into several groups to present case studies with regard to globalization. Cases will be derived from contemporary and current events or individual backgrounds of the class. After oral presentation, this team-work needs to be concluded in a 6 to 8-page paper. 1 Details will follow in class. 3. Attendance and Participation (15%): Discussion is essential to the class and students are required to submit questions based upon the reading materials for each week (one question for MA students and two for PhD students) prior to the class, by 10pm on Wednesdays. * Cell phones shall be turned off or to silent mode during the class. Computers or tablets are not allowed except with prior permission from the instructor. Make-up assignments will not be granted except in case of emergency and in all cases require a note from your doctor. This class adopts a zero-tolerance policy on plagiarism. AFTER CLASS: Students are recommended to read international news covered by media on a daily basis. COURSE READINGS: Major references: Alan Alexandroff and Andrew Cooper, eds., Rising States, Rising Institutions: Challenges for Global Governance (Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2010). Peter M. Haas, John A. Hird, and Beth McBratney, eds., Controversies in Globalization: Contending Approaches to International Relations (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2010). Paul F. Diehl, ed., The Politics of Global Governance: International Organizations in An Interdependent World, 3rd Ed. (Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 2005). US National Intelligence Council, Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds (hereafter GT 2030). Other reading materials from journals and websites may be assigned with the weekly schedule. WEELY COURSE SCHEDULE: Week 1: Course overview and introduction Week 2: 【February 28th Memorial Day, No Class】 Week 3: Definition of Globalization GT 2030, talking points. Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, “Globalization: What’s New? What’s Not? (And So What?)” Foreign Policy 118 (Spring 2000), pp. 104-120. Martin Walker, “Globalization 3.0,” The Wilson Quarterly, Vol. 31, Issue 4 (Autumn 2 2007), pp. 16-24. Moises Naim, “Globalization,” Foreign Policy 171 (March/April 2009), pp. 28-34. Week 4: IR Theory and Globalization: Much Ado about Nothing? Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation [1944] (NY: Octagon Books, 1980), Ch. 6, pp. 68-77. Alexander Gerschenkron, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective: A Book of Essays (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962), pp. 5-30. James N. Rosenau, “Many Globalizations, One International Relations,” Globalizations, Vol. 1, No. 1 (September 2004), pp. 7-14. * Kenneth Waltz, “Globalization and Governance,” PS: Political Science and Politics 32 (December 1999), pp. 693-700. * Fred Block, “Karl Polanyi and the Writing of ‘The Great Transformation’,” Theory and Society, Vol. 32, No. 3 (Jun., 2003), pp. 275-306. Week 5: Economic Interdependence and Globalization (I): Good Things always Go together? Theodore C. Bestor, “How Sushi Went Global,” Foreign Policy 121 (November/December 2000), pp. 54-63. Joseph Stiglitz, “Globalism’s Discontents,” The American Prospect, Vol. 13, No. 1 (January 1, 2002 - January 14, 2002), http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/162/27705.html (accessed 2010/2/18). Jagdish N. Bhagwati, “In Defense of Globalization: It Has a Human Face,” Rivista di Politica Economica (November-December 2004), pp. 9-20. Week 6: 【Guest Speech】 3 Week 7: 【Spring Break, No Class】 Week 8: Economic Interdependence and Globalization (II): Winners vs. Losers? Peter Katzenstein, Small States in World Markets (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 1985), introduction. Geoffrey Garrett, “Global Markets and National Politics: Collision Course or Virtuous Circle?” International Organization 52 (Autumn 1998), pp. 787-824. Dani Rodrik, “Trading In Illusions,” Foreign Policy 123 (March/April 2001), pp. 54-62. Ethan Kapstein, “Winners and Losers in the Global Economy,” International Organization 54 (Spring 2000), pp. 359-384. Week 9: Economic Interdependence and Globalization (III): Financial Crisis as Inevitable? Robert H. Wade, “Is Globalization Reducing Poverty and Inequality?” World Development, Vol. 32, No. 4 (2004), pp. 567-589. Stiglitz, Globalization and Its Discontents, Ch. 3-4 (pp. 53-132). Eric Helleiner, “Understanding the 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis: Lessons for Scholars of International Political Economy,” Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 14 (June 2011), pp. 67-87. Michael Spence, “The Impact of Globalization on Income and Employment,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 90, No. 4 (July/August 2011), pp. 28-41. Week 10: Power Politics and Globalization (I): Is Power Politics Obsolete? Kenneth Waltz and James Fearon, “A Conversation with Kenneth Waltz,” Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 15 (June 2012), pp. 1-12. Beth A. Simmons, “Review: State Authority and Market Power,” Mershon International Studies Review, Vol. 42, No. 1 (May 1998), pp. 135-139. 4 Edward D. Mansfield and Helen V. Milner, “The New Wave of Regionalism,” International Organization, Vol. 53, No. 3 (Summer 1999), pp. 589–627. Yale Ferguson, “The Crisis of the State in a Globalizing World,” Globalizations, Vol. 3, No. 1 (March 2006), pp. 5-8. Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, “Transnational Advocacy Networks in International and Regional Politics,” International Social Science Journal, Vol. 51, Iss. 159 (1999), pp. 89-101. * Susan Strange, The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), excerpt. * Thomas G. Moore, “Chinese Foreign Policy in the Age of Globalization,” in Yong Deng and Feiling Wang, eds., China Rising: Power and Motivation in Chinese Foreign Policy. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publisher, 2005), pp. 121-158. Week 11: Power Politics and Globalization (II): How Serious is the Clash of Civilizations? Samuel P. Huntington, “Clashes of Civilization?” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3 (Summer 1993), pp. 22-49. Fouad Ajami, “The Summoning,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 4 (September/October 1993), pp. 2-9. Samuel P. Huntington, “If Not Civilizations, What? Paradigms of the Post-Cold War World,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 5 (November/December 1993), pp. 186-194. Eric Neumayer and Thomas Plümper, “International Terrorism and the Clash of Civilizations,” British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 39 (2009), pp. 711-734. *Kishore Mahbubani, “The Dangers of Decadence,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 4 (September/October 1993), pp. 10-14. Week 12: Power Politics and Globalization (III): State-Society Relations Revisited 5 Kathleen Thelen, “Varieties of Capitalism: Trajectories of Liberalization and the New Politics of Social Solidarity,” Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 15 (June 2012), pp. 137-159. Peter Haas, “Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination,” International Organization 46 (Winter 1992), pp. 1-35. James H. Mittelman and Robert Johnston, “The Globalization of Organized Crime, the Courtesan States, and the Corruption of Civil Society,” Global Governance, Vol. 5, No.1 (1999), pp. 103-126. Sebastian Mallaby, “NGOs: Fighting Poverty, Hurting the Poor,” Foreign Policy 144 (September/October 2004), pp. 50-58. * Peter J. Spiro, “Review: Nonstate Actors in Global Politics,” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 92, No. 4 (October 1998), pp. 808-811. * Ann Marie Clark, Elizabeth Friedman, and Kathryn Hochstetler,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Waltz's Theory of Theory
    WALTZ’S THEORY OF THEORY 201 Waltz’s Theory of Theory Ole Wæver Abstract Waltz’s 1979 book, Theory of International Politics, is the most infl uential in the history of the discipline. It worked its effects to a large extent through raising the bar for what counted as theoretical work, in effect reshaping not only realism but rivals like liberalism and refl ectivism. Yet, ironically, there has been little attention paid to Waltz’s very explicit and original arguments about the nature of theory. This article explores and explicates Waltz’s theory of theory. Central attention is paid to his defi nition of theory as ‘a picture, mentally formed’ and to the radical anti-empiricism and anti-positivism of his position. Followers and critics alike have treated Waltzian neorealism as if it was at bottom a formal proposition about cause–effect relations. The extreme case of Waltz being so victorious in the discipline, and yet being so consistently misinterpreted on the question of theory, shows the power of a dominant philosophy of science in US IR, and thus the challenge facing any ambitious theorising. The article suggests a possible movement of fronts away from the ‘fourth debate’ between rationalism and refl ectivism towards one of theory against empiricism. To help this new agenda, the article introduces a key literature from the philosophy of science about the structure of theory, and particularly about the way even natural science uses theory very differently from the way IR’s mainstream thinks it does – and much more like the way Waltz wants his theory to be used.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Change in International Politics: the New Institutionalism and the Interpretative Approach
    Analyzing Change in International Politics: The New Institutionalism and the Interpretative Approach - Guest Lecture - Peter J. Katzenstein* 90/10 This discussion paper was presented as a guest lecture at the MPI für Gesellschaftsforschung, Köln, on April 5, 1990 Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Lothringer Str. 78 D-5000 Köln 1 Federal Republic of Germany MPIFG Discussion Paper 90/10 Telephone 0221/ 336050 ISSN 0933-5668 Fax 0221/ 3360555 November 1990 * Prof. Peter J. Katzenstein, Cornell University, Department of Government, McGraw Hall, Ithaca, N.Y. 14853, USA 2 MPIFG Discussion Paper 90/10 Abstract This paper argues that realism misinterprets change in the international system. Realism conceives of states as actors and international regimes as variables that affect national strategies. Alternatively, we can think of states as structures and regimes as part of the overall context in which interests are defined. States conceived as structures offer rich insights into the causes and consequences of international politics. And regimes conceived as a context in which interests are defined offer a broad perspective of the interaction between norms and interests in international politics. The paper concludes by suggesting that it may be time to forego an exclusive reliance on the Euro-centric, Western state system for the derivation of analytical categories. Instead we may benefit also from studying the historical experi- ence of Asian empires while developing analytical categories which may be useful for the analysis of current international developments. ***** In diesem Aufsatz wird argumentiert, daß der "realistische" Ansatz außenpo- litischer Theorie Wandel im internationalen System fehlinterpretiere. Dieser versteht Staaten als Akteure und internationale Regime als Variablen, die nationale Strategien beeinflussen.
    [Show full text]
  • Phd in Political Science Comprehensive Examination Guidebook
    Department of Political Science __________________________________________________________ PhD in Political Science Comprehensive Examination Guidebook Contents Pages 2-3: Examination Overview and General Directions Pages 4-10: Reading Lists Page 4- Methodology Page 5- American Government Page 6- Comparative Politics Page 7- International Relations Page 9- Public Policy Page 11-13: Sample Questions for Written Examination Page 11- Methodology Page 12- American Government Page 12- Comparative Politics Page 12- International Relations Page 13- Public Policy EXAMINATION OVERVIEW AND GENERAL DIRECTIONS Doctoral students sit For the comprehensive examination at the conclusion of all required coursework, or during their last semester of coursework. Students will ideally take their exams during the fifth semester in the program, but no later than their sixth semester. Advanced Entry students are strongly encouraged to take their exams during their Fourth semester, but no later than their FiFth semester. The comprehensive examination is a written exam based on the literature and research in the relevant Field of study and on the student’s completed coursework in that field. Petitioning to Sit for the Examination Your First step is to petition to participate in the examination. Use the Department’s graduate petition form and include the following information: 1) general statement of intent to sit For a comprehensive examination, 2) proposed primary and secondary Fields areas (see below), and 3) a list or table listing all graduate courses completed along with the Faculty instructor For the course and the grade earned This petition should be completed early in the registration period For when the student plans to sit For the exam.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Political Science
    Introduction to Political Science Professor Scott Williamson Fall 2021, Bocconi University e-mail: [email protected] Office hours: TBD Office: TBD Office room: TBD Class hours: TBD Class room: TBD Course Description What explains the rise of populism? How do authoritarian regimes hold onto power? Who opposes migration and why? When is the public more likely to hold political leaders accountable for poor governance? This course introduces the academic discipline of political science by exploring what its literatures have to say about these topics and others with substantive importance to global politics. We will read and discuss recent academic work utilizing a variety of methodological tools to answer these questions. In addition, the course is designed to help students navigate practical issues related to the effective conduct of political and social science research. We will review research practicalities ranging from choosing a research question to finding data and submitting articles to journals. Throughout the course, students will prepare a research proposal on a topic of their choice, which they will present to the class and submit in written format at the conclusion of the term. Course Objectives Throughout the course, students should expect: ▪ To develop knowledge about several major literatures in political science, gaining familiarity with ongoing debates and established findings. ▪ To acquire familiarity with a variety of primarily quantitative research methods used in political science and other social science disciplines. ▪ To develop understanding of how to consume and evaluate academic research, including how to recognize positive contributions, identify weaknesses, and provide constructive feedback in oral and written forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Reviewer Fatigue? Why Scholars PS Decline to Review Their Peers’ Work
    AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION Reviewer Fatigue? Why Scholars PS Decline to Review Their Peers’ Work | Marijke Breuning, Jeremy Backstrom, Jeremy Brannon, Benjamin Isaak Gross, Announcing Science & Politics Political Michael Widmeier Why, and How, to Bridge the “Gap” Before Tenure: Peer-Reviewed Research May Not Be the Only Strategic Move as a Graduate Student or Young Scholar Mariano E. Bertucci Partisan Politics and Congressional Election Prospects: Political Science & Politics Evidence from the Iowa Electronic Markets Depression PSOCTOBER 2015, VOLUME 48, NUMBER 4 Joyce E. Berg, Christopher E. Peneny, and Thomas A. Rietz dep1 dep2 dep3 dep4 dep5 dep6 H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 Bayesian Analysis Trace Histogram −.002 500 −.004 400 −.006 300 −.008 200 100 −.01 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 Iteration number −.01 −.008 −.006 −.004 −.002 Autocorrelation Density 0.80 500 all 0.60 1−half 400 2−half 0.40 300 0.20 200 0.00 100 0 10 20 30 40 0 Lag −.01 −.008 −.006 −.004 −.002 Here are some of the new features: » Bayesian analysis » IRT (item response theory) » Multilevel models for survey data » Panel-data survival models » Markov-switching models » SEM: survey data, Satorra–Bentler, survival models » Regression models for fractional data » Censored Poisson regression » Endogenous treatment effects » Unicode stata.com/psp-14 Stata is a registered trademark of StataCorp LP, 4905 Lakeway Drive, College Station, TX 77845, USA. OCTOBER 2015 Cambridge Journals Online For further information about this journal please go to the journal website at: journals.cambridge.org/psc APSA Task Force Reports AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION Let’s Be Heard! How to Better Communicate Political Science’s Public Value The APSA task force reports seek John H.
    [Show full text]
  • Varieties of Liberalization and the New Politics of Social Solidarity
    Kathleen Thelen Vol.XVIII, No. 66 - 2012 Vol.XVIII, Varieties of Liberalization and the New Politics XXI (73) - 2015 of Social Solidarity 2014. Cambridge University Press. Pages: 251 ISBN: 9781107679566 Are notions of solidarity obsolete in the face of the free market? Is there a single developed capitalism or are there many? Is there a best, most efficient way to delimit the state from the market and the public from the private or are there alternative, equally efficient solutions? Comparative political economy is often based on the premise that the latter is true. In particular, the now classic Varieties of Capitalism (VofC) comparative approach postulates two types of institutional frameworks. The general idea was that each institutional solution generates positive externalities which may or may not be captured by specific solutions in other institutional domains. Therefore, the precondition for economic success of any given country is not any single institutional solution, but rather a consistent approach throughout the political economy cutting through finance, labor markets, education, inter-firm relations etc. The analysis of developed countries revealed two principal types of such institutional consistency – the coordinated market economy (CME) as a more restrictively regulated variety of capitalism and the liberal market economy (LME) as a more flexible variety oriented towards free markets. The CME path to efficiency and growth is based on the formation of specific skills, protected and organized labor markets and long-term bank-centric corporate governance systems. This was considered as an approach of the Scandinavian countries, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands and Japan. On the other hand, LME countries base their institutional comparative advantage on general skill formation, flexible labor markets with low unionization and short-term oriented corporate governance with predominant stock-market financing.
    [Show full text]
  • Bringing the State Back Into the Varieties of Capitalism and Discourse Back Into the Explanation of Change* by Vivien A
    Center for European Studies Program for the Study of Germany and Europe Working Paper Series 07.3 (2007) Bringing the State Back Into the Varieties of Capitalism * And Discourse Back Into the Explanation of Change by Vivien A. Schmidt Jean Monnet Professor of European Integration Department of International Relations, Boston University 152 Bay State Road, Boston MA 02215 Tel: 1 617 3580192; Fax: 1 617 3539290 Email: [email protected] Abstract The Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) literature’s difficulties in accounting for the full diversity of na- tional capitalisms and in explaining institutional change result at least in part from its tendency to downplay state action and from its rather static, binary division of capitalism into two overall systems. This paper argues first of all that by taking state action—used as shorthand for govern- ment policy forged by the political interactions of public and private actors in given institutional contexts—as a significant factor, national capitalisms can be seen to come in at least three varie- ties: liberal, coordinated, and state-influenced market economies. But more importantly, by bring- ing the state back in, we also put the political back into political economy—in terms of policies, political institutional structures, and politics. Secondly, the paper shows that although recent re- visions to VoC that account for change by invoking open systems or historical institutionalist in- *Paper prepared for presentation for the panel: 7-5 “Explaining institutional change in different varieties of capitalism,” of the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association (Philadelphia PA, Aug. 31-Sept. 3, 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Paths to a Sound Governance of the World
    Governance in a Changing World: Meeting the Challenges of Liberty, Legitimacy, Solidarity, and Subsidiarity Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, Extra Series 14, Vatican City 2013 www.pass.va/content/dam/scienzesociali/pdf/es14/es14-kuan.pdf Paths to a Sound Governance of the World HSIN-CHI KUAN Introduction In his paper “Accountability, Transparency, Legitimacy, Sustainable De- velopment and Governance”, Buttiglione takes governance as “the product or the activity of government” that is in turn defined as “a system of organs that govern a community”. This understanding is not very useful for our search for a better gover- nance of the world. It only suggests that the most distinct feature of gover- nance is the lack of a government. It remains uncertain whether the world is being “governed” by a system of organs that is however not qualified as a government. The distinction between government and governance ap- parently lies not in the activity. The activity of government varies radically from time to time and from country to country. In the past when govern- ment governed much less, the destiny of a people was also influenced by decisions that were not taken by their government authorities but by other domestic subjects whose actions were relevant to their welfare. This is, struc- turally speaking, the same kind of situation like what Buttiglione has de- scribed as of today, except that there are subjects acting from outside the affected country. In an indirect way, Buttiglione has attempted to clarify the difference between government and governance by reference to the erosion of state sovereignty.
    [Show full text]
  • Realist Thought and the Future of American Security Policy
    We encourage you to e-mail your comments to us at: [email protected]. The Past as Prologue Realist Thought and the Future of American Security Policy James Wood Forsyth Jr. Realism is dead, or so we are told. Indeed, events over the past 20 years tend to confirm the popular adage that “we are living in a whole new world.” And while some have proclaimed the death of power politics, it is worth remembering that we have heard this all before. Over the past 60 plus years, realism has enjoyed its time in the sun. Within the United States, realism initially arose during the interwar period in response to the perceived failures of Pres. Woodrow Wilson’s internationalism. By 1954, with the publication of the second edition of Hans Morgenthau’s Politics among Nations, those ideas had been discredited. During the 1970s, with gasoline shortages and a long, unsuccessful war in Vietnam tearing at America, the inadequacies of policy makers to properly frame world events led many to pursue other alternatives. Economic, political, and social changes led to the rise of topics such as transnational politics, international interdepen­ dence, and political economy, each of which allowed nonrealist perspec­ tives to carve out a substantial space for themselves. The dramatic ending of the Cold War—combined with the inability of policymakers to adequately explain, anticipate, or even imagine peaceful global change—ushered in a new round of thinking. Today many decision makers frame their policies around democracy, seeing it as the historical force driving the apparent peace among the world’s leading powers.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Second State Debate' in International Relations: Theory Turned Upside-Down
    Review of International Studies (2001), 27, 395–414 Copyright © British International Studies Association The ‘second state debate’ in International Relations: theory turned upside-down JOHN M. HOBSON Abstract. This article argues that conventional understanding of how IR theory concep- tualizes the state is in need of revision. By relocating IR theories of the state within the ‘second state’ debate, we find that neorealism underestimates the power of the state in world politics, while neoliberal institutionalism exaggerates its power. Moreover, liberalism, con- structivism, Marxism, postmodernism, and ‘second-wave’ Weberian historical sociology, all endow the state with greater degrees of agential power in the international realm than does neorealism. The significance of the second state debate will be not merely to reconfigure our understanding of how IR theory conceptualizes the state, but to turn conventional under- standing of IR theory upside-down. Introduction In this article I argue that conventional interpretive frameworks for understanding how IR theory conceptualizes the state are highly problematic, and are accordingly in need of revision. In particular, I argue that we can reconfigure traditional under- standing through the lens of what I propose to call the ‘second state debate’. In the process, I suggest that we emerge with a more accurate and nuanced understanding of IR theories of the state as well as of IR theory more generally. This essentially involves relocating IR theories of the state within the agent-structure problematic. In particular, I introduce two concepts when understanding the state: (1) domestic agential state power, (2) international agential state power. For the purposes of this article the most significant concept is the international agential power of the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Profiles in Statesmanship: Seeking a Better World Bruce W. Jentleson
    1 Profiles in Statesmanship: Seeking a Better World Bruce W. Jentleson Paper presented at the University of Virginia, International Relations Speaker Series April 12, 2013 Comments welcome; [email protected] Do not cite without permission 2 The usual metric for the world leaders’ scorecard is who has done the most to advance their own country’s national interests. The book I’m writing, Profiles in Statesmanship: Seeking a Better World, poses a different question: who has done the most to try to build peace, security and justice inclusive of, but not exclusive to, their own country’s particular national interests? There is statesmanship to make one’s own nation more successful. And there is Statesmanship to make the world a better place. This is not altruism, but it also is not just a matter of global interests as extensions of national ones as typically conceived. Both statesmanship and Statesmanship take tremendous skill and savvy strategy. The latter also takes a guiding vision beyond the way the world is to how it can and should be, as well as enormous courage entailing as it does great political and personal risk. Not surprisingly there are not a lot of nominees. Writing in 1910 and working with similar criteria --- not just “winning a brief popular fame . but to serving the great interests of modern states and, indeed, of universal humanity” --- the historian Andrew Dickson White identified Seven Great Statesmen.1 Two 19th century British historians compiled the four- volume Eminent Foreign Statesmen series, but using more the traditional small s-statesmanship criteria of just national interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Thelen, 1 Curriculum Vitae Kathleen Thelen Ford Professor of Political
    Thelen, 1 Curriculum Vitae Kathleen Thelen Ford Professor of Political Science, MIT and Permanent External Scientific Member, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne, Germany Address Department of Political Science [email protected] Massachusetts Institute of Technology http://web.mit.edu/polisci/faculty/K.Thelen.html 77 Massachusetts Avenue, E53-470 Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 Education M.A. (1981) and Ph.D. (1987), Political Science, University of California, Berkeley B.A. (1979), Political Science, University of Kansas (university and department honors) Teaching Positions Ford Professor of Political Science, MIT (2009-present) Payson S. Wild Professor of Political Science, Northwestern University (2005-2009) Professor of Political Science, Northwestern University (2004-2005) Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Northwestern University (1994-2004) Assistant Professor, Department of Politics, Princeton University, 1988-1994 Assistant Professor, Department of Government, Oberlin College, 1987-1988 Other Appointments and Invited Visiting Positions 2012- 2014 Research Fellow, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung April 2013: Guest scholar, Quality of Government Institute, University of Gothenburg, Sweden Summer 2011: Guest scholar, Institute for Advanced Study Berlin (Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin) and Science Center (Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung) Summer 2010: Visiting Professor, Sciences Po, Paris 2007-2011: Senior Research Fellow at Nuffield College, Oxford University, Oxford UK
    [Show full text]