Abstract
The state has been under siege in the study of global relations1 both substantively and theoretically. The strain has increased with time, particularly in the post-1945 period2 with the transnational destructive capacities of nuclear weapons3 the growth of the international market, most recently in ‘invisible’ goods such as services and finance4 and the global reach of sophisticated communications networks.5 The collapse of the binary world division between East and West and the apparent increased fragmentation and instability have left analysts challenged by the need to understand the violent uncertainties now produced6 or anxious to develop comforting theories of a new unified global age of liberal capitalism.7 The bottom line with regard to the state has been the degree to which it can be considered a suitable and concretely appropriate unit of analysis in international, or what I prefer, in the contemporary context, to call global, relations. Also, how does it divide the national domain ‘inside’ from the international domain ‘outside’ and what are the meanings of such divisions?8
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
The debate is a longstanding one, however. One of the best illustrations is E.H. Carr, The Twenty Years Crisis (London: Macmillan, 1946, 2nd ed.) first published 1939.
See J.H. Herz, ‘Rise and Demise of the Territorial State’, World Politics 9: 473–93, 1952 and
J.H. Herz, ‘The Territorial State Revisited’, Polity 1(1):11–34, 1968
See S. Strange, States and Markets, 2nd ed. (London: Pinter, 1994) and
R. Stubbs and G. Underhill, The Political Economy of Global Change (London: Macmillan, 1994)
See C.J. Hamelink, The Politics of World Communication (London: Sage, 1994).
See J. N. Rosenau, Turbulence in World Politics (Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1990).
The most noteworthy example of this reaction is Francis Fukuyama’s ‘end of history’ thesis in F. Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (London: Penguin, 1992).
See also G. Youngs, From International to Global Relations; A Conceptual Challenge (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996) and
Youngs, in G. Youngs and E. Kofman, Globalisation; Theory and Practice (London: Pinter, 1996)
See R. B. J. Walker, Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993).
See J. Mclean, ‘Political Theory’ International Theory as the Politics of Ideas’, Millennium, vol. 10, no. 2, 1981.
A useful overview of different approaches to nationalism is J.G. Kellas, The Politics of Nationalism and Ethnicity (London: Macmillan, 1991).
See B. Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1991).
K. Richard Ashley, ‘The Poverty of Neorealism’, International Organization 38(2) pp. 225–86, 1984.
See D. Baldwin, Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).
R.B.J. Walker, ‘Sovereignty, Identity, Community: Reflections on the Horizons of Contemporary Political Practice’, R.B.J. Walker and S. Mendlovitz (eds.), Contending Sovereignties: Rethinking Political Community. (Boulder, Col: Lynne Rienner, 1990).
See R.K. Ashley, ‘Three Modes of Economism’, International Studies Quarterly 27:463–9, 1983
R.K. Ashley and R.B.J. Walker, ‘Reading Dissidence/Writing the Discipline: Crisis and the Question of Sovereignty in International Studies’, International Studies Quarterly 34(3) pp. 367–416, 1990.
Maclean, in Millennium, vol 17, no. 2, 1988.
The most detailed realist statement can be found in H.J. Morgenthau and Kenneth W. Thompson, Politics Among Nations, 6th edn. (New York: Knopf, 1985) and the neorealist position is best explained in
K.N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979)
See J.D. Singer, ‘The Level of Analysis Problem in International Relations’ in K.L. Knorr, and S. Verba (eds), The International System: Theoretical Essays (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978).
T. Hobbes, Leviathan (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1909) (first published 1651).
K.N. Waltz, Man, the State and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959).
H. Bull, The Anarchical Society (London: Macmillan), 1977.
See Ignatieff, Blood and Belonging. Journeys Into the New Nationalism (London: BBC Books, 1993).
W. Connolly, Identity/Difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox (London: Cornell University Press, 1991).
J. Rosenberg, The Empire of Civil Society. A Critique of the Realist Theory of International Relations (London: Verso, 1994).
See, for example, M. Foucault, Les mots et les choses (Paris: Editions Gallimard, 1966).
Trans. as The Order of Things by A.S. Smith (London: Tavistock Publications, 1970).
See B. Buzan, People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security in the Post-Cold War Era (Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991).
See R. King, Mass Migration in Europe. The Legacy and the Future (London: Belhaven Press, 1993) and
E. Kofman and R. Sales, ‘Towards Fortress Europe?’ Women’s Studies International Forum 15(1):129–40, 1992.
See K. Booth and P. Vale, ‘Security in Southern Africa: After Apartheid; Beyond Realism’, International Affairs 71(2):285–304, 1995.
V.S. Peterson, and A.S. Runyan, Global Gender Issues (Boulder, Col.: Westview Press, 1993).
C.N. Murphy and R. Tooze, The New International Political Economy. (Boulder, Col.: Lynne Rienner, 1991).
R. Tooze, ‘Conceptualizing the Global Economy’, in A. G. McGrew and P. Lewis (eds), Global Politics: Globalization and the Nation-State (Cambridge: Polity, 1992).
C. Hill and P. Beshoff (eds), Two Worlds of International Relations. Academics and Practitioners in the Trade of Ideas (London: Routledge, 1994).
M. Featherstone (ed.) Global Culture. Nationalism, Globalisation and Modernity. (London: Sage, 1990) and
R. Robertson, Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture (London: Sage, 1992)
D. Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989).
G. Youngs, ‘Dangers of Discourse: The Case of Globalisation’ in Kofman and Youngs, 1991, and J. Tomlinson, Cultural Imperialism (London: Pinter, 1991).
Youngs, ‘Culture and the Technological Imperative: Missing Dimensions’, in M. Talalay, C. Farrands and R. Tooze (eds), Technology, Competitiveness and Culture in Global Political Economy (London: Routledge, 1996).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1996 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Youngs, G. (1996). Beyond the ‘Inside/Outside’ Divide. In: Krause, J., Renwick, N. (eds) Identities in International Relations. St Antony’s Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25194-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25194-0_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-69384-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-25194-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)