Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:41:14.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hegel's Views on War, the State, and International Relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Steven B. Smith
Steven B. Smith*
Affiliation:
The University of Texasat Austin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article I argue a thesis about Hegel's views on war different from most previous interpreters, e.g., Popper and Hook on the one side and Avineri and Pelczynski on the other. In particular I argue that his reflections on war are an attempt to answer the problem of political obligation or the question of why should anyone willingly die for the state. Accordingly, I examine briefly Hegel's critique of Kantian morality for its inability to account for political obligation proper and although ultimately I conclude that Hegel never completely extricated himself from Kant's belief in a providentialist historicism leading to a condition of “perpetual peace,” I still want to suggest that war remains for Hegel an essential moment in the “ethical” life of the state and perhaps the chief means whereby the dignity and autonomy of the state can be exerted over the network of private interests that constitutes civil society.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 77 , Issue 3 , September 1983 , pp. 624 - 632
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1983

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

Arendt, H. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on the banality of evil. New York: Viking Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Avineri, S. Hegel's theory of the modern state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Cassirer, E. [The philosophy of the enlightenment] (Koelln, F. A. & Pettegrove, J., trans.) Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1950.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. Nachwort in Hegels politische Schriften. Frankfort: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1966.Google Scholar
Hazard, P. [European thought in the eighteenth century] (J. L., trans.) London: Hollis & Carter, 1963.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. [The philosophy of right] (Knox, T. M., trans.) Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1946.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. [Reason in history] (Hartman, R. S., trans.) Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1953.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. [The German constitution]. In Pelczynski, Z. A. (Ed.) & Knox, T. M. (Trans.), Political writings. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. Jenaer realphilosophie. Hoffmeister, J. (Ed.). Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1969.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. [The phenomenology of mind] (Bailie, J. B., trans.) London: George Allen & Unwin, 1971a.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. On the positivity of the Christian religion. In Knox, T. M. (Trans.), Early theological writings. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1971b.Google Scholar
Heller, H. Hegel und der nationale Machtstaatsgedanke in Deutschland. Leipzig & Berlin: Neudruck, 1921.Google Scholar
Hirschman, A. O. The passions and the interests: Political arguments for capitalism before its triumph. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. Conjectural beginning of human history. In Beck, L. W. (Ed.) & Fackenheim, E. E. (Trans.), On history. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1963.Google Scholar
Kant, I. The contest of the faculties. In Reiss, H. (Ed.) & Nisbet, H. B. (Trans.) [Political writings]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970a.Google Scholar
Kant, I. Perpetual peace. In Reiss, H. (Ed.) & Nisbet, H. B. (Trans.) [Political writings]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970b.Google Scholar
Kant, I. Idea for a universal history. In Reiss, H. (Ed.) & Nisbet, H. B. (Trans.) [Political writings]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970c.Google Scholar
Kant, I. Metaphysical elements of justice. In Reiss, H. (Ed.) & Nisbet, H. B. (Trans.) [Political writings]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970d.Google Scholar
Kant, I. On the common saying: “This 05 be true in theory, but it does not apply in practice.” In Reiss, H. (Ed.) & Nisbet, H. B. (Trans.) [Political writings]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970e.Google Scholar
Kelly, G. A. Notes on Hegel's “Lordship and bondage.” Review of Metaphysics. 1966, 06: 780–802.Google Scholar
Kojève, A. [Introduction to the reading of Hegel] (Nichols, J. H. Jr., trans.) New York: Basic Books, 1969.Google Scholar
Lukacs, G. Der deutsche Faschismus und Hegel. In Schicksalwende: Beiträge zu einer deutschen idéologie. Berlin: Aufbau-Verlag, 1948, pp. 37–67.Google Scholar
Marcuse, H. Reason and revolution: Hegel and the rise of social theory. Boston: Beacon Press, 1955.Google Scholar
Plamenatz, J. Man and society (2 vols.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.Google Scholar
Popper, K. The open society and its enemies (2 vols.). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1950.Google Scholar
Riedel, M. Der begriff der “Burgerlischen Gessell-schaft” und das Problem seines geschichtlichen Ursprungs. In Studien zu Hegels rechtsphilosophie. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1969.Google Scholar
Verene, D. P. Hegel's account of war. In Pelczynski, Z. A. (Ed.), Hegel's political philosophy: Problems and perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. The obligation to die for the state. In Obligations: Essays on disobedience, war, and citizenship. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1970.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.