Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:11:04.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theory across time: the privileging of time-less theory in international relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2015

Christopher McIntosh
Christopher McIntosh*
Affiliation:
Bard College Political Studies, Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, New York, USA
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How does the understanding of time and temporality in international relations (IR) shape the study of international politics? IR is centrally concerned with the study of issues such as armed conflict, but wars are events – a series of occurrences that only come into being through their relationship across time. The concept of time at work in the understanding of this event thus plays an inextricable role in the scholarship produced. IR shares an understanding of time that pervades (traditional) social science and is based on the Western notion of clock-time. This conception of time encourages a spatiotemporal model of the past that epistemologically privileges temporal understandings that value generalizable, time-invariant theory and discount temporal fluidity and context. These temporal commitments operate at a deep level, informing and shaping theory construction in important ways and de-emphasizing alternative approaches that may more accurately reflect the contingency of international events, discontinuities in political practice, and the radical shifts in international structures, which are often most in need of scholarly analysis. This article concludes that by treating temporality as a stand-alone issue, IR can better model and predict international political practices.

Keywords

temporalityIR theoryinternational security
Type
Original Papers
Information
International Theory , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , November 2015 , pp. 464 - 500
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

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

Abbott, Andrew. 1992. “From Causes to Events Notes on Narrative Positivism.” Sociological Methods & Research 20(5):428–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Andrew. 2001. Time Matters: On Theory and Method. Abbott, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Adam, Barbara. 1990. Time and Social Theory. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Adler, Emanuel, and Pouliot, Vincent. 2011. International Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alker, Hayward. 1984. “Historical Argumentation and Statistical Inference: Towards More Appropriate Logics for Historical Research.” Historical Methods 173:164–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aminzade, Ronald. 1992. “Historical Sociology and Time.” Sociological Methods & Research 20(4):456–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amoureux, Jack, and Steele, Brent, eds. 2015. Reflexivity and International Relations. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashley, Richard, and Walker, Rob. 1990. “Reading Dissidence/Writing the Discipline: Crisis and the Question of Sovereignty in International Studies.” International Studies Quarterly 34(3):367–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barcham, Manuhuia. 2000. “(De)Constructing the Politics of Indigeneity.” In Duncan Ivison, Paul Patton, & Will Sanders (Eds.), Political theory and the rights of indigenous peoples. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 137–151.Google Scholar
Bates, Robert H, Avner Greif, Margaret Levi, Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, and Barry Weingast. 1998. Analytic Narratives . Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, Harry, and Elisabetta Brighi, eds. 2009. Pragmatism in International Relations. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, Carl. 1955. “What Are Historical Facts?” The Western Political Quarterly 8(3):327–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, Andrew, and Elman, Colin. 2006. “Complex Causal Relations and Case Study Methods: The Example of Path Dependence.” Political Analysis 14(3):250–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berenskoetter, Felix. 2011. “Reclaiming the Vision Thing: Constructivists as Students of the Future1.” International Studies Quarterly 55(3):647–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Thomas. 1997. “The Past in the Present: Historical Memory and German National Security Policy.” German Politics 6(1):39–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bigo, Didier. 2011. “Pierre Bourdieu and International Relations: Power of Practices, Practices of Power.” International Political Sociology 5(3):225–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleiker, Roland. 2011. “The Aesthetic Turn in International Political Theory.” Millennium 30(2):509–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brigg, Morgan, and Bleiker, Roland. 2010. “Autoethnographic International Relations : Exploring the Self as a Source of Knowledge.” Review of International Studies 36(3):779–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers. 1996. Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buthe, Timothy. 2002. “Taking Temporality Seriously: Modeling History and the Use of Narratives as Evidence.” American Political Science Review 96(3):481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, David. 1992. Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Capoccia, Giovanni, and Kelemen, Daniel R.. 2007. “The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism.” World Politics 59(3):341–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cederman, Lars-Erik. 2001. “Back to Kant: Reinterpreting the Democratic Peace as a Macrohistorical Learning Process.” American Political Science Review 95(1):15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cederman, Lars-Erik. 2002. “Endogenizing Geopolitical Boundaries with Agent-Based Modeling.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99(3):7296–7303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Marchi, Scott. 2005. Computational and Mathematical Modeling in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimock, Wai-chee. 2002. “Non-Newtonian Time: Robert Lowell, Roman History, Vietnam War.” American Literature 74(4):911–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagleton-Pierce, Lawrence. 2011. “Advancing a Reflexive International Relations.” Millennium 39(3):805–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falleti, Tulia G., and Lynch, Julia F.. 2009. “Context and Causal Mechanisms in Political Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 42:1143–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James, and Laitin, David. 2003. “Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War.” American Political Science Review 97(1):75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finel, Bernard, and Lord, Kristin. 2000. Power and Conflict in the Age of Transparency. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interests in International Society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fioretos, Orfeo. 2011. “Historical Institutionalism in International Relations.” International Organization 65(2):367–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedrichs, Jörg, and Kratochwil, Friedrich. 2009. “On Acting and Knowing: How Pragmatism Can Advance International Relations Research and Methodology.” International Organization 63(4):701–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosden, Christopher. 1994. Social Being and Time. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Grieco, Joseph. 1988. “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism.” International Organization 42(2):485–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, Larry. 1993. “Narrative, Event-Structure Analysis, and Causal Interpretation in Historical Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 98(5):1094–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, Lloyd. 2000. Ruling the World: Power Politics and Rise of Surpranational Institutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Grzymala-Busse, Anna. 2011. “Time Will Tell? Temporality and the Analysis of Causal Mechanisms and Processes.” Comparative Political Studies 44(9):1267–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Rodney Bruce, and Friedrich V. Kratochwil. 1993. “Medieval Tales: Neorealist “Science” and the Abuse of History.” International Organization 47(3):479–91.Google Scholar
Hall, Todd. 2011. “We Will Not Swallow This Bitter Fruit: Theorizing a Diplomacy of Anger.” Security Studies 20(4):521–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamati-Ataya, Inanna. 2010. “Knowing and Judging in International Relations Theory: Realism and the Reflexive Challenge.” Review of International Studies 36(44):1079–1101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamati-Ataya, Inanna. 2011. “The ‘Problem of Values’ and International Relations Scholarship: From Applied Reflexivity to Reflexivism.” International Studies Review 13(2):259–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harff, Barbara. 2003. “No Lessons Learned from the Holocaust? Assessing Risks of Genocide and Political Mass Murder Since 1955.” American Political Science Review 97(1):57–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobden, Stephen, and John M. Hobson. 2002. Historical Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hom, Andrew. 2010. “Hegemonic Metronome: The Ascendancy of Western Standard Time.” Review of International Studies 36(4):1145–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hom, Andrew, and Steele, Brent. 2010. “Open Horizons: The Temporal Visions of Reflexive Realism.” International Studies Review 12(2):271–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchings, Kimberly. 2007. “Happy Anniversary! Time and Critique in International Relations Theory.” Review of International Studies 33(1):71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchings, Kimberly. 2008. Time and World Politics: Thinking the Present. Manchester: Manchester University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. 2010. The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and Its Implications for the Study of World Politics. Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus, and Nexon, Daniel. 1999. “Relations Before States: Substance, Process, and the Study of World Politics.” European Journal of International Relations 5(3):291–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, Lee. 2009. Times of Terror: Discourse, Temporality and the War on Terror. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keck, Margaret, and Sikkink, Katherine. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert, and Martin, Lisa. 1995. “The Promise of Institutionalist Theory.” International Security 20(1):39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert, and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kratochwil, Friedrich. 2006. “History, Action and Identity: Revisiting the ‘Second’ Great Debate and Assessing Its Importance for Social Theory.” European Journal of International Relations 12(1):5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, Keith, and Williams, Michael. 1997. “From Strategy to Security: Foundations of Critical Security Studies.” In Critical Security Studies: Concepts and Cases, edited by Keith Krause, and Michael Williams, 33–59. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Kurki, Milja. 2006. “Causes of a Divided Discipline: Rethinking the Concept of Cause in International Relations Theory.” Review of International Studies 32(2):189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layne, Christopher. 2003. “America as European Hegemon.” National Interest 72:17–30.Google Scholar
Lepgold, Joseph, and Nincic, Miroslav. 2000. Being Useful: Policy Relevance and International Relations Theory. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lipschutz, Ronnie. 1995. On Security. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lundborg, Tom. 2012. Politics of the Event: Time, Movement, Becoming. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lustick, Ian. 1996. “History, Historiography, and Political Science: Multiple Historical Records and the Problem of Selection Bias.” American Political Science Review 90(3):605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madsen, Mikeal. 2011. “Reflexivity and the Construction of the International Object: The Case of Human Rights.” International Political Sociology 5(3):259–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mearsheimer, John. 1994–1995. “The False Promise of International Institutions.” International Security 19(3):5–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mearsheimer, John. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Murray, Michelle. 2010. “Identity, Insecurity, and Great Power Politics: The Tragedy of German Naval Ambition Before the First World War.” Security Studies 19(4):656–688.Google Scholar
Pape, Robert A. 2005. “Soft Balancing Against the United States.” International Security 30(1):7–45.Google Scholar
Park, Jong Hee. 2010. “Structural Change in US Presidents’ Use of Force.” American Journal of Political Science 54(3):766–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patomäki, Heikki. 2011. “On the Complexities of Time and Temporality: Implications for World History and Global Futures.” Australian Journal of Politics & History 57(3):339–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, T.V., Larson, Deborah Welch, and Wohlforth, William, eds. 2014. Status in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Guy, Pierre, Jon, and King, Desmond. 2005. “The Politics of Path Dependency: Political Conflict in Historical Institutionalism.” Journal of Politics 67(4):1275–1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pouliot, Vincent. 2008. “The Logic of Practicality: A Theory of Practice of Security Communities.” International Organization 62(2):257–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, Huw. 1996. Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Quadagno, Jill, and Knapp, Stan. 1992. “Have Historical Sociologists Forsaken Theory? Thoughts on the History/Theory Relationship.” Sociological Methods & Research 20(4):481–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasmussen, Mikkel. 2003. “The History of a Lesson Versailles, Munich and the Social Construction of the Past.” Review of International Studies 29(4):499–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sambanis, Nicholas. 2004a. “What Is Civil War? Conceptual and Empirical Complexities of an Operational Definition.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 48(6):814–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sambanis, Nicholas. 2004b. “Using Case Studies to Expand Economic Models of Civil War.” Perspectives on Politics 2:259–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroeder, Paul. 1994. “Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory.” International Security 19(1):108–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sewell, William. 1996. “Three Temporalities: Toward an Eventful Sociology.” The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences, ed. Terrence McDonald, 245–80. Ann Arbor: UMichigan Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, Jack. 1991. Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, Jack. 2003. “Imperial Temptations.” National Interest 71:29–40.Google Scholar
Solomon, Ty. 2013. “Time and Subjectivity in World Politics.” International Studies Quarterly 58(4):671–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spiro, David. 1994. “The Insignificance of the Liberal Peace.” International Security 19(2):50–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri, Williams, Patrick, and Chrisman, Laura. 1994. Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory: A Reader, 66–111. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Tannenwald, Nina. 1999. “The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non-Use.” International Organization 53(3):433–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 1999. “Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 2(1):369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Evera, Stephen. 1997. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wagner‐Pacifici, Robin. 2010. “Theorizing the Restlessness of Events1.” American Journal of Sociology 115(5):1351–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, R.B.J. 1990. “Security, Sovereignty, and the Challenge of World Politics.” Alternatives 15:3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, R.B.J. 1993. Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walt, Stephen. 1991. “The Renaissance of Security Studies.” International Studies Quarterly 35(2):105–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltz, Kenneth. 1979. Theory of International Relations. Reading: Addison-Webley.Google Scholar
Weber, Cynthia. 1998. “Performative States.” Millennium 27:77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weberman, David. 1997. “The Nonfixity of the Historical Past.” The Review of Metaphysics 50(4):749–768.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1995. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security 20(1):71–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1998. “On Constitution and Causation in International Relations.” Review of International Studies 24(5):101–118.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 2001. “Driving with the Rearview Mirror: On the Rational Science of Institutional Design.” International Organization 55(4):1019–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, Alexander E. 1987. “The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory.” International Organization 62(2):335–370.Google Scholar
Western, Bruce, and Kleykamp, Meredith. 2004. “A Bayesian Change Point Model for Historical Time Series Analysis.” Political Analysis 12(4):354–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Michael. 2005. The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar