Alexander Wendt, in chapter 1 of his book “Social Theory of
International Politics” emphasized on the environment of International System through the lens of four sociologies.
He
stressed more on the ontology of International Order in the start of the
chapter. According to him, before claiming that how international order is
constructed, one needs to understand its nature properly. It is not as simple
as it looks at a glance. The main actors in constructivism are States, Multinational
Corporations and Transnational Social Movements and International System as its
level of analysis. Furthermore he tried to show that international system is
not a very social place for states. Interaction does take place in
international arena but it does not really construct the motives and interests
of states. In fact interaction is usually based on the own purposes. However there
is an impact of this interaction on behavior of states which is constructed. Unlike
individuals (humans), behavior of states could be reducible to itself in a way
if states’ behavior is based on material interests.
The four sociologies of International Politics, as defined
by Alexander Wendt, are Materialist, Idealist, Individualist; and holist. Further
he used the combination of ideas of two sociologies to apply it on
international politics because he wanted to confined himself somewhere
between the two extremes. And therefore, he claimed and showed as well that how
this theory is not only applicable in IR but on domestic and individual level as well. The two continuum presented by him from four sociologies are
materialists-idealists and individualists-holistic. It is not hard to see that both
continuums are made up of varied ideas. Materialists-Idealists tell us that
actors’ behavior is based on both material environment and social consciousness
at the same time. On the other hand, Individualists-Holists take about whether
behavior of the actors reducible to itself or invested in properties of state.
Okay summary, but what do you think about Wendt's piece? Do you buy his argument that ideas matter?
ReplyDelete