Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:22:04.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

14 - Global Governance and the Emergence of a ‘World Society’

from Part 3 - Framing a World

Friedrich Kratochwil
Affiliation:
European University Institute, Florence
Nathalie Karagiannis
Affiliation:
University of Sussex
Peter Wagner
Affiliation:
European Institute Florence; University of Warwick
Get access

Summary

That nations dwell in eternal anarchy has been one of the defining assumptions that have shaped the socialization of several generations of students of international relations. While political struggle inside the state takes place in the shadow of the law (conceived as the sovereign's command), this mediation was thought to be absent in the international arena. However, the demise of the Soviet Union and the increase in the volume, scope and speed of transnational interactions challenged this traditional assumption of anarchy and nonco-operation. Departing from the presumption that war was now a less plausible defining characteristic of the international arena, and the subsequent subversion of the foundational distinction between ‘internal’ and ‘external’ arenas, it was naturally tempting to conceive of these fundamental changes as constituting a transformation of the international system into a global or ‘world society’. This chapter will consider to what extent this argument is valid.

Several strands of argument converged to produce this new ‘synthesis’ of global change. First, so successful was realism's imposition of its own conception of the world system that, when the premises of anarchy were called into question, it seemed that no other vocabulary was as readily available as that of a ‘society’. Second, the failure of socialism seemed to prove the impossibility of an alternative to the liberal political project and thus suggested the ‘end of history’. Third, the ‘sociological’ vocabulary also pointed to a way out of the conceptual impasses of earlier debates, in which states were conceived of not only as rigid billiard balls but also as ‘containers’ for their respective societies.

Type
Chapter
Information
Varieties of World Making
Beyond Globalization
, pp. 266 - 286
Publisher: Liverpool University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×