Over the years, every student of IR have been taught to distinguish between ‘what is’ and ‘what ought to be’. The former apparently defines the reality as it is whereas the latter is reflective of the sugar coated reality which one desires to acheive. But then came in Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikki who decided to bring about a ‘tsunami’, not a façade in this case but a genuine transformation in thought which should leave everyone in awe who reads the article (more than one fan-girl I suppose). Who says we need to distinguish between ‘what is’ and ‘what ought to be’ when we can combine both to form a what is which can also be what ought to be. That is a proposition which the authors formulate within their article using norms as the tools for bringing about such a change.
The article discusses the role of norms in bringing about a political change, either by being the change in itself or changing the features of the political landscape. In both scenarios, norms have the tendency to bring about a change in the political arena. The article takes a turn and tackles the notion of how norms can transform the standards of appropriateness to bring about a change. The authors discuss precisely how a norm life cycle operates and how are norms socially constructed by those around us based on the appropriateness of a norm. This is the case both in the domestic realm and how states behave in the international system. But then that leads to us questioning what is an ‘appropriate norm’? According to the authors, the appropriateness can only be determined “by reference to the judgments of a community or a society. We recognize norm-breaking behavior because it generates disapproval or stigma and norm conforming behavior either because it produces praise, or, in the case of a highly internalized norm, because it is so taken for granted that it provokes no reaction whatsoever”.
In this case, there can never be a bad norm because at some point in time, a norm is deemed acceptable and appropriate. But does that mean a norm can’t be changed or is it universal. No. And that is exactly what the authors are trying to unravel. Norms are social constructs and are capable of being changed or bring about a change depending on the context. This change is based on the three aspects of norms: their origins, the mechanisms by which they exercise influence, and the conditions under which norms will be influential in world politics. The reading discusses these three stages with reference to norms of war and women rights.
The prescriptive nature of norms is the true changing tools which can shape both an individual and a state’s behavior. The oughtness can become a reality indeed. Norm influence as discussed in the article takes place in three stages: norm emergence, norm acceptance and norm cascade. Another intriguing aspect in this article has to do with norm entrepreneurs which are a tool whereby a norm can emerge. This can be tied to the status quo in the world right now which is embroiled in intolerance and apathy with regards to the violence and terrorism around us. There is a need for such people who start educating from a grass root level and adopt a bottom-up approach in creating new norms and ideals of tolerance and empathy which can eventually become a reality.
The article discusses the role of norms in bringing about a political change, either by being the change in itself or changing the features of the political landscape. In both scenarios, norms have the tendency to bring about a change in the political arena. The article takes a turn and tackles the notion of how norms can transform the standards of appropriateness to bring about a change. The authors discuss precisely how a norm life cycle operates and how are norms socially constructed by those around us based on the appropriateness of a norm. This is the case both in the domestic realm and how states behave in the international system. But then that leads to us questioning what is an ‘appropriate norm’? According to the authors, the appropriateness can only be determined “by reference to the judgments of a community or a society. We recognize norm-breaking behavior because it generates disapproval or stigma and norm conforming behavior either because it produces praise, or, in the case of a highly internalized norm, because it is so taken for granted that it provokes no reaction whatsoever”.
In this case, there can never be a bad norm because at some point in time, a norm is deemed acceptable and appropriate. But does that mean a norm can’t be changed or is it universal. No. And that is exactly what the authors are trying to unravel. Norms are social constructs and are capable of being changed or bring about a change depending on the context. This change is based on the three aspects of norms: their origins, the mechanisms by which they exercise influence, and the conditions under which norms will be influential in world politics. The reading discusses these three stages with reference to norms of war and women rights.
The prescriptive nature of norms is the true changing tools which can shape both an individual and a state’s behavior. The oughtness can become a reality indeed. Norm influence as discussed in the article takes place in three stages: norm emergence, norm acceptance and norm cascade. Another intriguing aspect in this article has to do with norm entrepreneurs which are a tool whereby a norm can emerge. This can be tied to the status quo in the world right now which is embroiled in intolerance and apathy with regards to the violence and terrorism around us. There is a need for such people who start educating from a grass root level and adopt a bottom-up approach in creating new norms and ideals of tolerance and empathy which can eventually become a reality.
Excellent analysis. I particularly liked this quote: "Norms are social constructs and are capable of being changed or bring about a change depending on the context."
ReplyDeleteAnd norm entrepreneurs are trying to create change. You, me, our class - all of this is an attempt to create (or rediscover) norms related to tolerance, empathy, and responsibility.
We have had brief conversations regarding this, I really think a change has to come from within before transcending and having a trickle down effect. Start from somewhere I guess, even if it brings a tiny change.
ReplyDeleteYay - it sounds like you're maybe agreeing with me now :)
Delete