肯尼思·沃尔兹与列夫·托洛茨基——不平衡与综合发展视角下的无政府状态被引量：4

Kenneth Waltz and Leon Trotsky:Anarchy in the mirror of uneven and combined development

下载PDF

导出

摘要由于沃尔兹错误地将地缘政治过程与社会、经济过程割裂开来,他的新现实主义理论饱受诟病。然而,沃尔兹的批评者们也未能指出:社会现象和地缘政治现象如何能在一种统一的国际关系理论之中得到解释。诚如沃尔兹所言,这样的理论必须通过以下三个检验:它必须确定一个具体的国际关系现象领域的界限,必须辨识出这一领域中的结构化影响(并因此能够理论化)以及必须提供"一种敏锐的直觉"以揭示那些解释这些影响的因果关系。"不平衡与综合发展"理论(U&CD)能够通过上述三种检验。"国际"可以界定为由各种社会互动的多样性所产生的现象。我们运用格申克龙的后发优势理论能够识别社会多样性所产生的各种国际性的结构影响。通过思考人们关于第一次世界大战的争论,我们来探究由"不平衡与综合发展"理论所确定的因果机制如何被用来建构一种统一的社会学和地缘政治学的阐释。 Waltz＇s neorealist theory has been charged with falsely separating geopolitical from social and economic processes. Yet Wahz＇s critics themselves have failed to show how sociological and geopolitical phenomena can be explained in a unified international theory. Such a theory, says Waltz, would have to pass three tests. It must delimit a field of specifically international phenomena. It must identify structured （and hence theorizable） effects within this field. And it must furnish ＇a brilliant intuition＇, which reveals the causal relations that explain these effects. This article argues that the idea of ＇ uneven and combined development＇（U＆CD） can pass these tests. The article delimits ＇the international＇ as those phenomena arising from the interactive multiplicity of societies. Next, it uses Gerschenkron＇s theory of backwardness to identify internationally structured effects arising from societal multiplicity. And finally, by considering the debate on the First World War, it explores how the causal mechanisms identified by U＆CD can be used to construct a unified sociological and geopolitical explanation.

作者贾斯廷.罗森伯格郑广超

机构地区萨塞克斯大学国际关系学系吉林大学国际关系研究所

出处《史学集刊》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第3期39-64,共26页 Collected Papers of History Studies

关键词肯尼思·沃尔兹列夫·托洛茨基不平衡与综合发展理论新现实主义国际关系理论第一次世界大战 Kenneth Waltz Leon Trotsky uneven and combined development neo - realism international theory World War I

分类号 D091 [政治法律—政治学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献167

1John Ruggie, " Continuity and transformation in the world polity. Toward a neorealist synthesis", World Politics, Vol. 35, No. 2 ( 1983 ) . 261 - 285.
2Richard Ashley, "The poverty of neo - realism", International Organization, Vol. 38, No. 2 ( 1984 ) . 225 - 261.
3Helen Milner, "The assumption of anarchy in international relations theory. A critique", Review of International Studies, Vol. 17, No. 1 (1991) . 67 - 85.
4Jack Snyder, Myths of Empire. Domestic Politics and International Ambition, New York. Comell University Press, 1991.
5Barry Buzan, Charles Jones and Richard Little, The Logic of Anarchy. Neo - realism to Structural Realism, New York . Columbia University Press, 1993.
6Justin Rosenberg, The Empire of Civil Society. A Critique of the Realist Theory of lnternational Relations, London. Verso, 1994.
7Benno Teschke, The Myth of 1648. Class, Geolmlities and the Making of Modem International Relations, London. Verso, 2003.
8Martin Hall, "International relations and historical sociology. Taking stock of convergence", Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 6, No. 1 (1999). 101-109.
9Theda Skocpol, "A critical review of Barrington Moore' s social origins of dictatorship and democracy", Politics & Society, 4 (1973) . 1 -34.
10Anthony Jarvis, "Societies, states and geopolitics. Challenges from historical sociology", Review of International Studies, Vol. 15. No. 3 ( 1989 ) . 281 - 293.