Abstract
There has been a tendency to pursue regime type explanations as if arguments about democracy and autocracy are likely to be necessary and sufficient. Democracies do not fight other democracies while autocracies fight both democracies and autocracies. Yet, not only is it fair to say that we do not know for sure what it is about regime type that might restrain conflict within some dyads, we also do not know how much relative explanatory credit to give to regime type. Let us assume for the sake of argument that dyadic regime type does restrain war making propensities within democratic dyads. Surely, few would contend that regime type is the only variable of interest or influence. Only if all democratic states were equally likely to go to war with any nondemocratic state at any time could one insist that explanations involving democratic dyads were sufficient to account for why states go to war. No analyst is likely to be comfortable with such a claim.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Copyright information
© 2005 Karen Rasler and William R. Thompson
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rasler, K., Thompson, W.R. (2005). Path-Dependencies and Foreign Policy. In: Puzzles of the Democratic Peace Theory, Geopolitics and the Transformation of World Politics. Evolutionary Processes in World Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403982308_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403982308_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-4039-6824-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4039-8230-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)