Abstract
The theory of global legislative politics claims a perspective revolution of a sort in international relations research. We argue that instead of focusing on sources of power like wealth, might and ideology, i.e., the trinity of the Cold War period, and instead of focusing on communication messages in international relations, we had better examine the interaction modes and attributes of communications in international relations. When digitalized globalization permeates each and every part of the earth, the distinction between the three levels of analysis, i.e., individual, domestic (national) and international, has ceased to function neatly. Everything is connected to everything else; connectivity functions closely with vulnerability; complexity contains unpredictability. The development of multilateral treaties has played a key role in shaping and sharing an unprecedented liberal world order under digitalized globalization with two conditions: decline of use of violence and growth of democracy.
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
References
Anderson, J. (Ed.). (2002). Transnational democracy: Political spaces and border crossings. London: Routledge.
Cohen, R. (2017, December 23–25). Wondering why, if this is America. New York Times.
Davies, T. (2014). NGOs: A new history of transnational civil society. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gourevitch, P. (1978). The second image reversed: The international sources of domestic politics. International Organization, 32(4), 881–912.
Hale, T., & Held, D. (2017). Beyond gridlock. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hale, T., Held, D., & Young, K. (2013). Gridlock: Why global cooperation is failing when we need it Most. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hidalgo, C. (2016). Why information grows: The evolution of order, from atoms to economies. New York: Penguin Books.
Howard, M. (2012). Transnationalism in ancient and medieval societies: The role of cross-border trade and travels. New York: McFarland.
Huntington, S. (1997). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Inglehart, R. (2018). Cultural evolution: People’s motivations are changing, and reshaping the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Inoguchi, T. (1982). Kokusai Seiji Keizai no kozu (the framework of international political economy). Tokyo: Yuhikaku.
Inoguchi, T. (2003). Political security: Toward a broader conceptualization. International Studies, 40(2), 105–123.
Inoguchi, T. (2015). War occurrence, hyper-insecurity and multilateral institutions. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 16(3), 388–398.
Inoguchi, T. (Ed.). (2018). The Wilsonian moment: Japan 1912–1952. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 19(4), 565–621.
Inoguchi, T., & Le, L. T. Q. (2016). Toward modelling a global social contract: Jean-Jacques Rousseau and John Locke. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 17(3), 489–522.
International Institute of Security Studies. (2017). Strategic survey 2017: The annual assessment of geopolitics. London: Routledge.
Iriye, A. (2004). Global community: The role of international organizations in the making of the contemporary world. Oakland: University of California Press.
Iriye, A. (2014). Global interdependence: The world after 1945. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Iwabuchi, K. (2002). Recentering globalization: Popular culture and Japanese transnationalism. Durham: Duke University Press.
Le, T. Q. L., Mikami, Y., & Inoguchi, T. (2014). Global leadership and international regime: Empirical testing of cooperation without hegemony paradigm on the basis of 120 multilateral conventions deposited to the United Nations system. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 15(4), 523–601.
McGrew, A., & Held, D. (2007). Globalization theory: Approaches and controversies. Cambridge: Polity.
Murphy, C. (1994). International organization and industrial change: Global governance since 1850. New York: Oxford University Press.
Putnam, R. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42(3), 427–490.
Rosenberg, E. (Ed.). (2012). A world connecting (Vol. 1870–1945). Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Tallberg, J., Sommerer, T., Squatrito, T., & Jönsson, C. (2013). The opening up of international organizations: Transnational access in global governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taseer, A. (2018, June 22). How Britain lost its power of seduction. The New York Times.
Tett, G. (2019, April 17). Do we need an IMF to regulate the internet? Financial Times. (Nikkei Shimbun, April 29, 2019).
The Economist. (2017, July 13). If Britain became ‘Singapore-on-Thames’: The British economy if the country crashes out of the European Union. https://www.economist.com/the-world-if/2017/07/13/the-british-economy-if-the-country-crashes-out-of-the-european-union
Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism (key ideas). London: Routledge.
Welzel, C. (2013). Freedom rising: Human empowerment and the quest for emancipation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Inoguchi, T., Le, L.T.Q. (2020). Theory of Global Legislative Politics. In: The Development of Global Legislative Politics. Trust, vol 3. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9389-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9389-2_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-32-9388-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-32-9389-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)