Advertisement

Why Study Modern Subjectivities in World Society? An Introduction

  • Dietrich JungEmail author
  • Stephan Stetter
Chapter
First Online:
  • 229 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Studies in International Relations book series (PSIR)

Abstract

At the change of the millennium, in a special issue of Third World Quarterly Clive Kessler named globalization a “scholarly monster.” With respect to the analysis of global affairs, Kessler considered the academic debate about globalization to be a part of the problem rather than offering a solution. According to him, countless academics across the world “have produced literally hundreds of books and thousands of articles probing the question of globalization” (Kessler 2000, 932).

Keywords

Modern Subjectivity Formation World Society Global Horizon Postcolonial Globality International Peacebuilding Actors 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Andersen, Nils A. 2003. Discursive Analytical Strategies: Understanding Foucault, Koselleck, Laclau, Luhmann. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayat, Asef. 2010. Life as Politics: How Ordinary People Change the Middle East. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, Ulrich, and Natan Sznaider. 2006. Unpacking Cosmopolitanism for the Social Sciences: A Research Agenda. The British Journal of Sociology 57 (1): 1–23.Google Scholar
  4. Bigo, Didier, and R.B.J. Walker. 2007. Political Sociology and the Problem of the International. Millennium 35 (3): 725–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borch, Christian. 2005. Systemic Power: Luhmann, Foucault, and Analytics of Power. Acta Sociologica 48 (2): 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burch, William R., Jr. 1974. Review of World Society by John W. Burton. American Journal of Sociology 80 (2): 663–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burton, John W. 1972. World Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Busse, Jan. 2017. Deconstructing the Dynamics of World-Societal Order: The Power of Governmentality in Palestine. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Buzan, Barry. 2004. From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buzan, Barry, and Richard Little. 2001. Why International Relations Has Failed as an Intellectual Project and What to Do About It. Millennium 30 (1): 19–39.Google Scholar
  11. Certeau, Michel de. 1984. The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dunne, Tim, Lene Hansen, and Colin Wight. 2013. The End of International Relations Theory? European Journal of International Relations 19 (3): 405–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foucault, Michel. 1984. What is Enlightenment? In The Foucault Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow, 32–51. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  14. Habermas, Jürgen. 2005. Zwischen Naturalismus und Religion: Philosophische Aufsätze. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  15. Halliday, Fred. 2005. The Middle East in International Relations: Power, Politics and Ideology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haynes, Jeffrey. 2006. Religion and International Relations in the 21st Century: Conflict or Cooperation? Third World Quarterly 27 (3): 535–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jacobi, Daniel, and Annette Freyberg-Inan (eds.). 2015. Human Beings in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jepperson, Ronald L., and John W. Meyer. 2000. The “Actors” of Modern Society: The Cultural Construction of Social Agency. Sociological Theory 18 (1): 100–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jung, Dietrich. 1995. Tradition—Moderne—Krieg. Grundlegung einer Methode zur Erforschung kriegsursächlicher Prozesse im Kontext globaler Vergesellschaftung. Münster and Hamburg: LIT.Google Scholar
  20. Jung, Dietrich. 2001. The Political Sociology of World Society. European Journal of International Relations 7 (4): 443–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jung, Dietrich. 2004. World Society, Systems Theory and the Classical Sociology of Modernity. In Observing International Relations: Niklas Luhmann and World Politics, ed. Mathias Albert and Lena Hilkermeier, 103–118. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Jung, Dietrich. 2017. Muslim History and Social Theory: A Global Sociology of Modernity. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kessler, Clive. 2000. Globalization: Another False Universalism? Third World Quarterly 21 (6): 931–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kessler, Oliver. 2009. Towards a Sociology of the International? International Relations Between World Society and Anarchy. International Political Sociology 3 (1): 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luhmann, Niklas. 1990. The World Society as a Social System. In Essays on Self-Reference, ed. Niklas Luhmann, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  26. MacGinty, Roger, and Oliver P. Richmond. 2013. The Local Turn in Peace-Building: A Critical Agenda for Peace. Third World Quarterly 34 (5): 763–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Meyer, John W., J. Boli, G.M. Thomas, and F.O. Ramirez. 1997. World Society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology 103 (July): 144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reckwitz, Andreas. 2006. Das hybride Subjekt. Eine Theorie der Subjektkulturen von der bürgerlichen Moderne zur Postmoderne. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft.Google Scholar
  29. Scholte, Jan Aart. 2000. Globalization: A Critical Introduction. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Stäheli, Urs. 2000. Sinnzusammenbrüche: Eine dekonstruktive Lektüre von Niklas Luhmanns Systemtheorie. Weilerswist: Velbrück.Google Scholar
  31. Stetter, Stephan. 2016. ‘Säen und Erten: Quantentheorie sozial- und (welt–)gesellschaftstheoretisch weitergedacht. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 23 (2): 188–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Strozier, Robert M. 2002. Foucault, Subjectivity, and Identity: Historical Constructions of Subject and Self. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Taylor, Charles. 1989. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Taylor, Charles. 2007. A Secular Age. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Thomas, George M. 2004. Sociological Institutionalism and Research Designs for Studying World Society. In Observing International Relations: Niklas Luhmann and World Politics, ed. Mathias Albert and Lena Hilkermeier, 72–85. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Thomas, George M. 2009. World Polity, World Culture, World Society. International Political Sociology 3 (1): 115–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Valbjørn, Morten. 2017. Strategies for Reviving the International Relations/Middle East Nexus After the Arab Uprisings. PS: Political Science & Politics 50 (3): 647–651.Google Scholar
  38. Vásquez, Manuel A., and Marie Friedmannn Marquart. 2003. Globalizing the Sacred: Religion Across the Americas. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1974. The Modern World System. Vol. I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Yüksel, Gökcen, Stephan Stetter, and Jochen Walter. 2016. Localizing Modern Female Subjectivities: World Society and the Spatial Negotiation of Gender Norms in Turkey. Alternatives 41 (2): 59–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Contemporary Middle East StudiesUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark
  2. 2.Faculty of Social Sciences and Public AffairsBundeswehr University MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options