Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:58:56.286Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in International Relations

Lockean Liberalism in International Relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 March 2024

Alexandru V. Grigorescu  and
Claudio J. Katz
Alexandru V. Grigorescu
Affiliation:
Loyola University Chicago
Claudio J. Katz
Affiliation:
Loyola University Chicago

Summary

This Element applies a new version of liberalism to international relations (IR), one that derives from the political theory of John Locke. It begins with a survey of liberal IR theories, showing that the main variants of this approach have all glossed over classical liberalism's core concern: fear of the state's concentrated power and the imperative of establishing institutions to restrain its inevitable abuse. The authors tease out from Locke's work its 'realist' elements: his emphasis on politics, power, and restraints on power (the 'Lockean tripod'). They then show how this Lockean approach (1) complements existing liberal approaches and answers some of the existing critiques directed toward them, (2) offers a broader analytical framework for several very different strands of IR literature, and (3) has broad theoretical and practical implications for international relations.
Get access

Keywords

IR theoryliberalismLockeinternational organizationsrestraints on power
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in International Relations
Online ISBN: 9781009516952
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 04 April 2024

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.)

References

Alter, K. J. (2014). The New Terrain of International Law: Courts Politics Rights. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Alter, K. J., Helfer, L. R., and Madsen, M. R. (2018). Conclusion: Context Authority Power. In International Court Authority, Alter, K. J., Helfer, L. R., and Madsen, M. R. eds., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 435–60.Google Scholar
Amr, M. S. M. (2003). The Role of the International Court of Justice as the Principal Judicial Organ of the United Nations. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arendt, H. (2014). On Violence. Cheshire: Stellar Classics.Google Scholar
Arneil, B. (1996). The Wild Indian’s Venison: Locke’s Theory of Property and English Colonialism in America. Political Studies 44(1), 64–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashcraft, R. (1986). Revolutionary Politics and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashcraft, R. (1987). Locke’s Two Treatises of Government. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ashcraft, R. (1992). The Radical Dimensions of Locke’s Political Thought: A Dialogic Essay on Some Problems of Interpretation. History of Political Thought 13(4), 703–72.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. N., and Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Barrett, J. (2020). Punishment and Disagreement in the State of Nature. Economics and Philosophy 36(3), 334–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bearce, D. H., and Bondanella, S. (2007). Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence. International Organization 61(4), 703–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, D. (2014). What Is Liberalism? Political Theory 42(6), 682–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benner, T., Reinicke, W. H., and Witte, J. M. (2004). Multisectoral Networks in Global Governance: Towards a Pluralistic System of Accountability. Government and Opposition 39(2), 191–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosco, D. L. (2014). Rough Justice: The International Criminal Court in a World of Power Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bull, H. (1977). The Anarchical Society. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, H. (1981). Hobbes and the International Anarchy. Social Research 48(4), 717–38.Google Scholar
Carr, E. H. (2001). The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919–1939. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Carswell, A. J. (2013). Unblocking the UN Security Council: The Uniting for Peace Resolution. Journal of Conflict and Security Law 18(3): 453–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chadwick, A. (2003). Searching for Democratic Potential in Emerging Global Governance. In Transnational Democracy in Critical and Comparative Perspective: Democracy’s Range Reconsidered. Morrison, B. ed., London: Ashgate, 87–106.Google Scholar
Cox, R. H. (1960). Locke on War and Peace. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, R. W. (1981). Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory. Millennium 10(2), 126–55.Google Scholar
Curtin, D. (1999). ‘Civil Society’ and the European Union: Opening Spaces for Deliberative Democracy? In Academy of European Law (ed.), European Community Law, The Hague/Boston/London, Kluwer Law International/Martinus Nijhoff Publishers/Florence, Academy of European Law, European University Institute, 1999, Collected Courses of the Academy of European Law, 1996, VII/1, 185-280 Collected Courses of the Academy of European Law.Google Scholar
Deudney, D. (2007). Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Deudney, D., and Ikenberry, J. G. (2021). Getting Restraint Right: Liberal Internationalism and American Foreign Policy. Survival 63(6), 63–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, S. (2011). A Distinct Judicial Power: The Origins of an Independent Judiciary, 1606–1787. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Doyle, M. W. (1983). Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs. Philosophy and Public Affairs 12(3), 205–35.Google Scholar
Doyle, M. W. (1986). Liberalism and World Politics. American Political Science Review 80(4), 1151–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubin, M. D. (1983). Transgovernmental Processes in the League of Nations. International Organization 37(3), 469–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, J. (1984). The Concept of “Trust” in the Politics of John Locke. In Philosophy in History, Essays on the Historiography of Philosophy, Rorty, R., Schnedwind, J. B., and Skinner, Q. eds., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 279–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, D. F. (1984). The Political Theory of the Federalist. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fatovic, C. (2004). Constitutionalism and Contingency: Locke’s Theory of Prerogative. History of Political Thought 25(2), 276–97.Google Scholar
Fish, M. S., and Kroenig, M. (2009). The Handbook of National Legislatures: A Global Survey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Florini, A. (2003). The Coming Democracy: New Rules for Running a New World. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Forrester, K. (2012). Judith Shklar, Bernard Williams and Political Realism. European Journal of Political Theory 11(3), 247–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, J. D., Munch, W., and Othman, K. I. (2000). Strengthening the Investigations Function in United Nations System Organizations: Joint Inspection Unit Report 2000 ⁄ 9. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
Galston, W. A. (2010). Realism in Political Theory. European Journal of Political Theory 9(4), 385–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, J. (2006). Accountability and Global Governance: The Case of Iraq. Ethics & International Affairs 20(1): 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, R. W. (1987). John Locke’s Liberalism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, R. W., and Keohane, R. O. (2005). Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics. American Political Science Review 99(1), 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grigorescu, A. (2010). The Spread of Bureaucratic Oversight Mechanisms across Intergovernmental Organizations. International Studies Quarterly 54(3), 871–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grigorescu, A. (2015). Democratic Intergovernmental Organizations? Normative Pressures and Decision-Making Rules. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grigorescu, A. (2023). Restraining Power Through Institutions: A Unifying Theme for Domestic and International Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habegger, B. (2010). Democratic Accountability of International Organizations: Parliamentary Control within the Council of Europe and the OSCE and the Prospects for the United Nations. Cooperation and Conflict 45(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, M., and Hobson, J. M. (2010). Liberal International theory: Eurocentric but not always Imperialist? International Theory 2(2), 210–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, A., Madison, J., and Jay, J. (1961 [1788]). The Federalist, ed., with an introduction and notes by Cooke, Jacob, E. Hanover, NH: Wesleyan University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, R. P. (2009). Adam Smith and the Character of Virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., Lake, D. A., Nielson, D., and Tierney, M. (eds.). (2006). Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helfer, L. R., and Slaughter, A.-M. (2005). Why States Create International Tribunals: A Response to Professors Posner and Yoo. California Law Review 93, 899–956.Google Scholar
Henig, R. (2010). The League of Nations. London: Haus.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. (1994) [1651]. Leviathan, ed. Curley, E. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, S. (1959). International Relations: The Long Road to Theory. World Politics 11, 346–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, S. (1995). The Crisis of Liberal Internationalism. Foreign Policy 98, 159–77.Google Scholar
Hulliung, M. (1976). Montesquieu and the Old Regime. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikenberry, G. J. (2001). After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikenberry, G. J. (2011). Liberal Leviathan: The Origins Crisis and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, L. D. (2014). “Uniting for Peace”: Does It Still Serve Any Useful Purpose? American Journal of International Law 108, 106–15.Google Scholar
Kahler, M. (2004). Defining Accountability Up: the Global Economic Multilaterals. Government and Opposition 39(2), 132–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1991) [1784]. Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose. In Kant’s Political Writings, 2nd ed., with an introduction and notes by Reiss, H. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1991) [1795]. Perpetual Peace, A Philosophical Sketch. In Kant’s Political Writings, 2nd ed., with an introduction and notes by Reiss, H. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 93–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1991) [1797]. The Metaphysics of Morals. In Kant’s Political Writings, 2nd ed., with an introduction and notes by Reiss, H. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 131–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1991) [1792]. On the Common Saying: “This May be True in Theory, but it does not Apply in Practice.” In Kant’s Political Writings, 2nd ed., with an introduction and notes by Reiss, H. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 61–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (1989). International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (1990). International Liberalism Reconsidered. In Dunn, J. ed., The Economic Limits to Modern Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 165–94.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (1995). Hobbes’s Dilemma and Institutional Change in World Politics: Sovereignty in International Society. In Whose World Order? Uneven Globalization and the End of the Cold War, Holm, H. and Sorensen, G. eds., Boulder: Westview, 165–86.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (2001). Governance in a Partially Globalized World. American Political Science Review 95(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O., and Nye, J. (2002). The Club Model of Multilateral Cooperation and Problems of Democratic Legitimacy. In Power and Governance in a Partially Globalized World. Keohane, R. O. ed., New York: Routledge, 219–44.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (2003). Global Governance and Democratic Accountability. In Taming Globalization – Frontiers of Governance, Held, D. and Koenig-Archibugi, M. eds., Cambridge: Polity, 130–59.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. (2005). Abuse of Power. Harvard International Review 27(2), 48–58.Google Scholar
Kloppenberg, J. R. (1986). Uncertain Victory: Social Democracy and Progressivism in European and American Thought, 1870–1920. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krasno, J., and Das, M. (2008). The Uniting for Peace Resolution and Other Ways of Circumventing the Authority of the Security Council. In The UN Security Council and the Politics of International Authority, Cronin, B., and Hurd, I., eds., London: Routledge, 173–95.Google Scholar
Krisch, N. (2010). Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, D. A. (2010). Rightful Rules: Authority, Order, and the Foundations of Global Governance. International Studies Quarterly 54(3), 587–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, D. (2007). Post-Communist States and the European Union. Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 23(4), 461–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, A. F., and Wiener, A. (2017). Handbook on Global Constitutionalism. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J. (1967) [1690]. Two Treatises of Government, ed. Laslett, P. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, J. (1975) [1689]. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Ed. with a Foreword by Nidditch, P. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Locke, J. (1990) [1664]. Questions Concerning the Law of Nature, with an introduction, text and translation by Horwitz, R. H., Clay, J. S., and Clay, D. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, J. (2003) [1689]. A Letter Concerning Toleration, ed. Walters, Kerry. Toronto: Broadview.Google Scholar
Long, D., and Wilson, P. (2003). Thinkers of the Twenty Years’ Crisis: Inter-War Idealism Reassessed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, R., Malleson, K., Martin, P., and Sand, P. (2010). Selecting International Judges: Principle, Process and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manent, P. (1995). Montesquieu and the Separation of Powers. In An Intellectual History of Liberalism, Manent, P., ed., tr. Balinski, R., Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Martinetti, I. (2006). Reforming Oversight and Governance of the UN Encounters Hurdles. New York: Center for UN Reform Education.Google Scholar
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1994). The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security 19(3), 5–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Megzari, A. (2015). The Internal Justice of the United Nations: A Critical History 1945–2015, Boston: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1989) [1859]. On Liberty. Collini, S., ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (1928). The Drafting of the Covenant. (Volumes I and II) New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.Google Scholar
Milner, H. (1991). The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory: A Critique. Review of International Studies 17(1), 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möllers, C. (2013). The Three Branches: A Comparative Model of Separation of Powers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montesquieu, C. (1949 [1748]). The Spirit of the Laws. Tr. Nugent, T. with an introduction by Neuman, F. New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. International Organization 51(4), 513–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1998). The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2008). The New Liberalism. In The Oxford Handbook of International Relations, Reus-Smit, C. and Snidal, D., eds., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 234–54.Google Scholar
Morgenthau, H. J. and Thompson, K. W. (1993). Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Nye, J. S., Einhorn, J. P., Kadar, B. et al. (2001). The “Democracy Deficit” in the Global Economy Enhancing the Legitimacy and Accountability of Global Institutions. Washington: The Trilateral CommissionGoogle Scholar
Oestreich, J. E. (ed.) (2012). International Organizations As Self-Directed Actors: A Framework for Analysis. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, C. (1999). WTO reaps the hard wages of its arrogance: [CHICAGOLAND FINAL EDITION]. Chicago Tribune. December 5. Retrieved from https://flagship.luc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/wto-reaps-hard-wages-arrogance/docview/419043420/se-2Google Scholar
Panayis, A. P. (1941). Théorie de la société internationale. Zürich: Éditions Polygraphiques.Google Scholar
Pangle, T. L. (1988). The Spirit of Modern Republicanism, The Moral Vision of the American Founders and the Philosophy of Locke. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pangle, T. L., and Ahrensdorf, P. J. (1999). Justice Among Nations, On the Moral Basis of Power and Peace. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Pape, R. (2005). Soft Balancing against the United States. International Security 30(1), 7–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, T. V. (2018). Restraining Great Powers: Soft Balancing from Empires to the Global Era. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. (1993). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as Fairness, a Restatement, Kelly, E. ed., Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reus-Smit, C. (2001). The Strange Death of Liberal International Theory. European Journal of International Law 12(3), 573–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reus-Smit, C., and Snidal, D. (eds.) (2008). The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, J. L. (2001). Contending Liberalisms in World Politics: Ideology and Power. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouban, L. (2007). Politicization of the Civil Service. In Handbook of Public Administration: Concise Paperback Edition, Peters, B. G., and Pierre, J., eds., London: SAGE, 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rummel, R. J. (1983). Libertarianism and International Violence. Journal of Conflict Resolution 27(1), 27–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russett, B. (1993). Grasping the Democratic Peace. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Russett, B., Layne, C., Spiro, D., and Doyle, M. (1995). The Democratic Peace: And Yet It Moves. International Security 19(4), 164–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russett, B., Oneal, J. R., and Davis, D. R. (1998). The Third Leg of the Kantian Tripod for Peace: International Organizations and Militarized Disputes, 1950–85. International Organization 52(3), 441–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Šabič, Z., and Charles, J. B. (2002). Small States in the Post-Cold War World: Slovenia and NATO Enlargement. Westport, CO: Praeger.Google Scholar
Sager, P. (2016). From Skepticism to Liberalism? The Foundations of Liberalism and Political Realism. Political Studies 64(2), 368–84.Google Scholar
Sandel, M. J. (1994). “Review” of Political Liberalism by Rawls, John. Harvard Law Review 107(7), 1765–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholte, J. A. (2011). Building Global Democracy?: Civil Society and Accountable Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. B. (1921). The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Seliger, M. (1969). The Liberal Politics of John Locke. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Shennan, J. (1968). The Parlement of Paris. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode.Google Scholar
Shklar, J. (1987). Montesquieu. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shklar, J. (1984). Ordinary Vices. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Shklar, J. (1989). The Liberalism of Fear, in Liberalism and the Moral Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. J. (1992). The Lockean Theory of Rights. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sleat, M. (2011). Liberal realism: A liberal Response to the Realist Critique. The Review of Politics 73(3), 469–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M. J. (1986). Realist Thought from Weber to Kissinger. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.Google Scholar
Staton, J. K., and Moore, W. H. (2011). Judicial Power in Domestic and International Politics. International Organization 65(3), 553–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stears, M. (2007). Liberalism and the Politics of Compulsion. British Journal of Political Science 37(3), 533–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffek, J., Kissling, P., and Nanz, P., eds. (2008). Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, A. (2008). Neoliberal Institutionalism. In Oxford Handbook on International Relations, Reus-Smit, C., and Snidal, D. eds., New York: Oxford University Press, 201–21.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J. E. (2003). Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Stone, R. W. (2011). Controlling Institutions: International Organizations and the Global Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strayer, J. R. (2005). On the Medieval Origins of the Modern State. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suganami, H. (2008). The Domestic Analogy and World Order Proposals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tallberg, J., Sommerer, T., Squatrito, T., and Jonsson, C. (2013). The Opening Up of International Organizations: Transnational Access in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tocqueville, A. (2000). Democracy in America. Mansfield, H. C., and Winthrop, D., eds., Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuck, R. (1999). The Rights of War and Peace: Political Thought and the International Order from Grotius to Kant. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tuckness, A. S. (2002). Locke and the Legislative Point of View: Toleration, Contested Principles, and Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tully, J. (1993). An Approach to Political Philosophy: Locke in Contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udall, L. (1998). The World Bank and Public Accountability: Has Anything Changed? In The Struggle for Accountability: The World Bank, NGOs, and Grassroots Movement, Box, J. A. and Brown, L. D., eds., Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 391–427.Google Scholar
Vincent, J. (1981). The Hobbesian Tradition in Twentieth-Century International Thought. Millennium 10, 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viola, L. A., Snidal, D., and Zürn, M. (2015). Sovereign (In)Equality in the Evolution of the International System. In The Oxford Handbook of Transformations of the State, Leibfried, S., Huber, E., Lange, M., Levy, J. D., Nullmeier, F., and Stephens, J. D. eds., The Oxford Handbook of Transformations of the State, Oxford: Oxford Academic, 221–36.Google Scholar
Von Clausewitz, C. (1918). On War. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner.Google Scholar
Waldron, J. (2006). Kant’s Theory of the State. In Immanuel Kant: Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History, Kleingeld, P. ed., New Haven: Yale University Press, 179–200.Google Scholar
Ward, L. (2005). Locke on Executive Power and Liberal Constitutionalism. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 38(3), 719–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, L. (2006). Locke on the Moral Basis of International Relations. American Journal of Political Science 50(3), 691–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, L. (2007). Montesquieu on Federalism and Anglo-Gothic Constitutionalism. Publius 37(4), 551–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Weede, E. (1984). Democracy and War Involvement. Journal of Conflict Resolution 28(4), 649–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, A. E. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, A. E. (2001). A Comment on Held’s Cosmopolitanism in Democracy’s Edges. Shapiro, I., and Hacker-Cordón, C. eds., London: Cambridge University Press, 127–33.Google Scholar
Whelan, F. G. (1995). Robertson, Hume, and the Balance of Power. Hume Studies 21(2), 315–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willetts, P. (1996). The Conscience of the World: The Influence of Non-Governmental Organisations in the UN System. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Williams, B. (2005). In the Beginning Was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument. Hawthorn, G. ed., Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, E. (1992). Locke Against Democracy: Consent, Representation, and Suffrage in the “Two Treatises.” History of Political Thought 13(4), 657–89.Google Scholar
Worth, O. (2015). Rethinking Hegemony. London: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckert, M. (1994). Natural Rights and the New Republicanism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Zuckert, M. (2002). Launching Liberalism: On Lockean Political Philosophy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Zürn, M. (2018). A Theory of Global Governance: Authority Legitimacy and Contestation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element 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.

Lockean Liberalism in International Relations
Available formats
×

Save element 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.

Lockean Liberalism in International Relations
Available formats
×

Save element 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.

Lockean Liberalism in International Relations
Available formats
×