この論文をさがす
説明
<jats:p>Building on a growing literature in international political science, I reexamine the traditional liberal claim that governments founded on a respect for individual liberty exercise “restraint” and “peaceful intentions” in their foreign policy. I look at three distinct theoretical traditions of liberalism, attributable to three theorists: Schumpeter, a democratic capitalist whose explanation of liberal pacifism we often invoke; Machiavelli, a classical republican whose glory is an imperialism we often practice; and Kant, a liberal republican whose theory of internationalism best accounts for what we are. Despite the contradictions of liberal pacifism and liberal imperialism, I find, with Kant and other democratic republicans, that liberalism does leave a coherent legacy on foreign affairs. Liberal states are different. They are indeed peaceful. They are also prone to make war. Liberal states have created a separate peace, as Kant argued they would, and have also discovered liberal reasons for aggression, as he feared they might. I conclude by arguing that the differences among liberal pacifism, liberal imperialism, and Kant's internationalism are not arbitrary. They are rooted in differing conceptions of the citizen and the state.</jats:p>
収録刊行物
-
- American Political Science Review
-
American Political Science Review 80 (4), 1151-1169, 1986-12
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Tweet
詳細情報 詳細情報について
-
- CRID
- 1362544418961870720
-
- ISSN
- 15375943
- 00030554
- http://id.crossref.org/issn/00030554
-
- データソース種別
-
- Crossref