Class Notes (834,244)
Canada (508,434)
POLSCI 1G06 (280)
Todd Alway (280)
Lecture 10

Political Science 1G06 2012 Lecture 10b overhead DPT.doc

4 Pages
47 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
POLSCI 1G06
Professor
Todd Alway
Semester
Winter

Description
Political Science 1G06 2012 Lecture 10b Democratic Peace Theory - Consider: Does a democratic state act differently in its Foreign Policy than a non-democratic state? Democratic Peace theory (see the article by Rosato, from whom this discussion is taken): - According to proponents of this theory, a simple study of the empirical evidence reveals the following pattern: Democracies do not go to war against other democracies - Democracies do go to war against non-Democracies, but not against each other Why: multiple causal explanations: - Recall that correlation does not imply causation - For what reason is it likely for Democracy to cause states to not go to war against one another? - At the same time the causal explanation must account for why democracies will go to war against non-Democracies - Amongst modern scholars there are generally two types of causal explanation offered: Norm based explanations: - Democracy creates certain norms that promote the “peaceful resolution of conflicts” - Democratic leaders are socialized into “nonviolent conflict resolution” in their domestic disputes - These leaders are likely to transfer this conflict resolution strategy to the international realm Institution based explanations: - Democratic institutions place certain constraints on democratically elected leaders o Constraints that do not restrain non-democratically elected leaders - 1. “Public constraint” - The public is likely to restrain democratically elected leaders from declaring war 1 - Why: The public bears the costs of war, both physical and monetary - 2. “Group constraint” - Input into the political process is open to multiple groups - In a democracy it is likely that at least some powerful groups will be against war - For example, War (especially between economically interdependent states) can negatively affect economic interests - 3. “Democracies are Slow to Mobilize for war” - Leaders in a democracy must convince both the general public, and influential social groups, that war is in fact necessary - This leaves time for a negotiated settlement between the disputing democratic states to arise - 4. There is Greater clarity of Information within democracies - The formation of public policy, including Foreign Policy is more transparent in Democratic states - It is easier to judge the intentions and willingness to actually go to war in a democratic state - This makes it more likely for two conflicting democratic states to negotiate towards a compromise o Rather than pursue the more risky alternative of waging war - This type of information is lacking in Non-Democratic countries - Even when an autocratic state is not planning on acting aggressively, the lack of transparency will make democratic states predisposed towards preemptive war - Criticisms: - 1. Is the correlation valid? Is it empirically accurate? - What is a democracy and what is not a democracy? - The empirical record depends very much upon how states have been categorized - There are several ambiguous cases where a plausible case can be made for a democracy being at war with another democracy - Moreover, Liberal Democrac
More Less

Related notes for POLSCI 1G06

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit