POL 208 Vocabulary.docx

15 Pages
98 Views
Unlock Document

School
University of Toronto St. George
Department
Political Science
Course
POL208Y1
Professor
Lilach Gilady
Semester
Fall

Description
POL 208 Vocabulary Lec1 Systematic organization effect: An effect in which various different factors organize the IR system‟s very complex structure. Levels of Analysis: different categories of approaching the analysis of IR issues or structures, through dividing the levels into  Individual  decision makers  government structure  society  international relations  world system Induction: an approach of solving question through collecting one data that leads to next evidence. Deduction: an approach of solving question through generating hypothesis by assumption and prediction and corresponding evidences Lec2 Sovereignty: Considering people, territory, bureaucracy and the king as a legal entity that cannot be violated by anyone from other country. It allows monopoly over the functions of the state in a defined territory, excluding all external intervention (monopoly over the legitimate use of force). Only 1 ruler in the region, and the authority of the region had equal power to other leaders. Paradigm: Group of theories that shares fundamental assumptions. Realism, Liberalism, etc. Lec3 The State of Nature: Hobbes‟ theoretical model of the world in which consists of no rules and no society. It claims the human life to be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”. It is constructed upon the assumption that people are rational and prioritize their own survival before anything, as the survival is the only human rights of nature. Therefore;  Person‟s right of nature justifies violence against others  Renouncing the rights of violence is impossible because there is no enforcer/ruler  Leviathan is the only existence that could enforce stability. Citizens must give up their independence in order to gain stability  Social constructs such as morality, justice and property can only exist when the state is strong and stable; therefore its existence solely depends on the presence of Leviathan. *Application to IR* Instead of individual, we talk about states. Nations would constantly go to war in the state of nature. Leviathan = world government. War is in a way right of nature…we fight to defend ourselves. It allows the realist theory to kick in. Just like billiard, states push the others in pockets without considering the “inside” of balls. Anarchy: Form of a society without leader or higher governing authority beyond the state. No world government. It focuses on survival that derives from self-help and self-interest, which in result creates constant potential for violence. Because each state care only about herself, there is always the fear of defection and limited potential for cooperation. The Security Dilemma: The dilemma in which states face due to the fact that the increase of security in one state is a threat for the others. Constant potential of conflicts urges states to be ready to defend themselves anytime, however this could be done solely by increasing force or gaining allies. This in fact produces an indirect threat to others which could change their behavior to be more aggressive. The dilemma: How can we increase our security without threatening others? Realism: IR theory that recognizes states to be the main actor, and the international system to be an anarchic world that struggles for power. It considers power to be the most important element in IR, and is used in relative term; country must be stronger than the other in order to make them do what they would not otherwise do. It recognizes states‟ main objective to maximize their security (power) as the world always faces potential conflict. As a result, sometimes it is inevitable for us to violate basic rules because the international system must be separated from ethics. State‟s survival must be considered before any other subject. Neorealism: Theory developed by Kenneth Waltz to analyze the international system more scientifically. It considered the implication of anarchy to be the need to maximize security, and the major difference between international/domestic politics. Distribution of power is different to each state, thus it leads to different behavior among states. This leads us to focus on the world system level of analysis, as some states are significantly more strong (important) than the smaller ones. Unipolarity: World structure with one great power and numbers of others that are all not strong enough to threaten the big power. (ex. Rome) Bipolarity: World structure with a “pole” created by allies formed by two big opposing powers. (ex. Cold War) Multipolarity: Words structure with many strong countries, but none capable of being the dominant power. (ex. WWI, old Europe) Lec4 Liberalism: IR theory that recognizes the actors (not limited to state only) to be rational and prefers to avoid conflict if it harms their prosperity and well being. State is a reflection of individuals, thus the collective will is produced rationally. Perpetual Peace: Developed by Immanuel Kant, which rejected the separation between moral imperative and the political realm. The theory developed after 1795‟s Basel Treaty, which Kant believed to be a treaty not for pursuing a true peace but rather a political peace that only aimed to satisfy France and Prussia‟s convenience (they were both in a situation they couldn't afford war with each other). Observing this, Kant believed the perpetual peace to be the mission for all human beings, and thus everyone must unite as one establish world federation and recommend social interactions across borders (peace = borderless). His idea Laissez-faire: Minimal governmental intervention in economic affairs. The market must work by itself in order to have the best possible outcome. *Application* Because individuals are rational, we recognize that trade generates more profit, and war brings loss. This makes us want to trade more and fight less  liberal peace. Neoliberalism: More scientific model of liberalism that focuses on the need of institutions. Institutions can impact the entire world, and thus influence the individual nature of behavior in larger scale. It emphasizes the goal of institution. (Ex.??? Marxism: IR theory that assumes actors to be class based, working in the capitalist system that are driven to make more money. Capital leads to increased productivity, and thus Capitalists aims to gain prosperity through investments and utilizing more capitals. This leads to increase in unemployed workers, thus less demand for goods and enforced price decrease/ wage decrease. Marxism argues that this phenomenon occurs in vicious cycle to create instable society, which then leads to revolution. *Application* Marx‟s argument is not justified because his predicted revolution never really occurred. Lenin and Hobson argued that this cycle in closed market did not take place as imperialism stopped state from being unstable. Imperialism was the cause of war in many weak states as a result of exploitation by larger states. Capitalism also reflects the realist point of view as its goal is to increase the capital of state, which then converts to power. Marxists therefore predicts IR scene to have more conflicts. Neo-Marxism: Developed by Immanuel Wallerstein, who introduced the holistic view of the world system. He based his arguments on analysis of Capitalist production and class relation (Marxist theory) with the focus on world system level. He saw the world structure to be made from 2 different types of states; Core and Periphery. Powerful core dominates weak periphery and creates hierarchy to stabilize the world. It also recognized the existence of semi-periphery states that seeks to join the core through following the natural flow of the system, hoping to increase its power by not causing any conflict. This then allows the core states to exploit them without disturbing the system. Lec5 Constructivism: Theory developed by Alexander Wandt. It focused on the social meanings of materials (ex. Border = road but also an emphasis of sovereignty). It is completely different from Realism or Liberalism in a sense that it is flexible; it could have similarity to both of them depending on the question…but its main exploration is to understand “how” and “why” the actors learn to behave in certain way. It seeks to clarify the connection between actors and the world, analyzing how each other influences the constantly changing reproduction of individual ideology/world structure. Wandt stated that social meanings are inter-subjective, in which it must be commonly understood by group of individuals. Identities, norms and social institutions are the main unit of analysis, because they are the ones that give specific social meaning to a physical material. *Application* Because any meaning depends on the social situation that constantly changes, Constructivism does not stick to one definition with constant understanding… while liberalism/realism focuses on the consequence, constructivism focuses on the appropriateness of the society. He claimed that objectivity is not enough to understand the social meanings because there are some important meanings that are shared only among those whom are involved in the group. Feminism: Developed by Ann Tickner. It originally is a theory that seeks to justify and facilitate the equal treatment of women to men. IR field was one of the last area to open up for feminism theory, as not many women are involved in decision making process. It critiqued how our knowledge is based mainly on scientific thoughts that implicitly considers men to be the subject of experiment. Gender neutrality is lacked in many aspects of IR theories and analysis. *Application* Feminism theory is hard to apply as it has very vague levels of analysis. It mainly aims to object the existent IR theories‟ credibility, for example its desirable behaviors being powerful, strong, determined and self-sufficient. Many positive criteria in IR represents masculinity. Feminism is hard to apply in specific levels of analysis, but it breaks the levels by challenging the norms that are never questioned. The hidden power relationship in individual to state levels are all considered to be equally problematic for Feminists. In IR politics, women are used for the justification of war, promotion of equality and peace sometimes symbol of war victory through rape… Tokenism: Explains how women had to act like men in order to prove they are furious/aggressive enough to be treated equally as men. Tokenism is used to explore the credibility of the claim “women are more peaceful than men”. Rationality: Based on all available actions, the actor has a clear ordering of preferences over all possible outcomes. Based on all available actions, the actor has a clear ordering of preferences over all possible outcomes. Rationality is analyzed through examining one‟s objective and priority, at the same time rejecting any moral or normative judgment. *Application* What must be carefully examined is the fact that rationality holds problem of aggregation. Outcomes need to be rational across all levels of analysis, yet many phenomenon are hard to explain in different levels (ex. Lemmings suicide for community‟s benefit). When observing the Marxist theory, we see that individual level of analysis will consider such society to be illogical…preferences of individual doesn't mean it could satisfy the preferences of aggregate. Unitary actor: Concept of states by Realists, in which they view a state to be acting unitarily because they are all rational and do not seek to be dependent on each other. Game Theory: Model of social interaction. Individuals make moves in social interaction regarding their preferences, and therefore the combination of both actors‟ choice determines the outcome. We consider all possible outcomes, and choose best response strategically. We use backward induction for this thinking process, and the theory suggests that we can predict certain behavior if we know the structure of the game and actor‟s preferences. Coordination games: Games in which both sides share interest, but holds different preferences. Players are forced to cooperate at least to fulfill their goals, thus they both compromise to satisfy different yet non-conflicting preferences. Lec6 Prisoner’s dilemma: A model of game theory that explains the dilemma faced by 2 actors that lacks trust in each other. It describes how both actors will not choose to cooperate for their mutual benefit because they care more about their own individual benefit. This makes them to betray each other and result in both sides harming themselves. It shows how the aggregation of rational decisions can produce sub optimal outcomes, because individual decision is rational but collective outcome is not. In IR, it is used as an explanation for the difficulty to sustain cooperation under anarchy because anarchic states fear each others and never fully trust one another. Nash Equilibrium: A pair of strategies (an outcome) for which neither player gains by changing her own strategy unilaterally. Policy change can only take place when it could be done mutually and simultaneously, as it requires mutual trust. The best strategy is to always defect regardless of other‟s action, because it is most rational.  the other side will think the same way. Tit for Tat: A method of continuous cooperation until one defects. It is a method used in iterated game to develop cooperation. This strategy works only in infinite game, because by knowing the game‟s limit and number of rounds, both players will use backward induction to defect world of sub optimal. Chicken Game: Social interaction game in which 2 sides try to make each other sway in order to gain benefit. It is not a dominant strategy game, and you must need to do what the other does. Application* Cuban Missile Crisis was the perfect example of chicken game. US and Soviet both tried to scare each other off by showing the threat of nuclear weapon, and tried to avoid the nuclear war. Continuous negotiation resulted with mutual win, as both US and Soviet Union agreed on compromising each other‟s missile removal. Absolute War: War in which every single resource is devoted for fighting. This war is never fought in reality and only exist in theory, because citizens simply will not be able to commit. Real War: Wars that are fought with fraction of absolute war. War in reality is always limited war, because citizens‟ needs of foods and other materials, or children‟s existence prevent the state from utilizing 100% of resources. Total War: War that is closest to that of Real War. It uses all possible resources (not entirely) devoted to war. It is still limited, but it seeks to utilize as many resources as possible. Militarized Interstate Dispute (MID): Includes conflicts that have blockades, occupations, clashes, raids. It includes everything that some aspect of military dimension in its event. Since 1946 to 1992, only 2.4% MIDs were considered as war. It is very rare to have crises in MIDs developing into war. Today, we have fewer inter-state wars with +1000 battle deaths. More wars take place inside state (civil war), and more deadly result and numbers of casualties is seen through civil wars. Lec7 Waltz’s 3 images: A method of analyzing the cause of war by separating the main focus on 3 different levels. 1 image: Focuses on human nature and actions stemming from individuals, what revolves around individuals. It analyzes the cause of war through biological, social, and psychological aspects. Relative deprivation: Explains how people act violently or aggressively due to the feeling of deprivation relative to the wealthier ones. It emphasizes how the absolute sense of poverty is not the main cause of individual‟s aggressiveness. Rising expectation: Feeling that derives from stronger relative deprivation due to more available tools of acknowledging the outside world (ex. Internet). Rising expectation is higher today than ever before. substantial change in people‟s status or in their consciousness of differences in status. *Application* It considers individual‟s emotional aspect such as greed and fear. It counts for the human errors, individual perception/belief on certain subject, and observes how these elements create behavioral changes that allow conflicts to arise. It also analyzes the miscommunication among individuals. st 1 image certainly explains the cause of wars, yet it fails to predict which war will be more likely to occur, as it is too limited of an analysis to lay out the specific factors and variables that explains the reoccurrence of war. Individual‟s influence on world politics is somewhat limited… nd 2 image: Focuses on domestic structure of the state, including regime type, economic interests and interest groups. It analyzes the cause of war through domestic political and economical aspects. *ndplication* 2 image allows us to analyze the behavior of 2 or multiple conflicting countries through observing what their self-interest and goal is. This is very liberal theory as it recognizes the state to be more than just a billiard balls. For example, Capitalism or Imperialism can be the cause of war, and the 2 image could give best explanation to understand how such ideologies lead us to war. However, it cannot clarify the different policies of countries that have similar domestic structure
More Less

Related notes for POL208Y1

Log In


OR

Don't have an account?

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