Conceptualizing good global statehood: progressive foreign policy after the populist moment

IF 2.2 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Theory Pub Date : 2022-09-29 DOI:10.1017/S1752971922000057
J. Gilmore
{"title":"Conceptualizing good global statehood: progressive foreign policy after the populist moment","authors":"J. Gilmore","doi":"10.1017/S1752971922000057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores the theoretical challenges for normatively progressive foreign policy following the rise of populist nationalism during the 2010s, using analytical concepts from the English School. It argues that populist nationalism exposes a problem of internal dissensus on the future trajectories of solidarist international society, within the Western states that have traditionally been its principal supporters. The ‘populist moment’ reveals problems of disconnection between domestic publics, the practices, and institutions of contemporary international society, and state actions that are premised in part on ethical regard for non-citizens. The article contends that, as an interface point between rooted communities and global ethical concerns, progressive foreign policy approaches have an important role to play in ameliorating these disconnections. However, these approaches must look beyond a simple ‘re-booting’ of liberal internationalism, focussing instead on building a path towards solidarist international society that is rooted in everyday-lived experiences, communities, and identities within the state. Building upon theorizations of good international citizenship, the article advances an alternative framework of good global statehood, which draws upon a coproduction methodology as a means of creating progressive foreign policies that are better attuned to pluralism and diversity across, but also within state borders.","PeriodicalId":46771,"journal":{"name":"International Theory","volume":"15 1","pages":"79 - 105"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971922000057","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article explores the theoretical challenges for normatively progressive foreign policy following the rise of populist nationalism during the 2010s, using analytical concepts from the English School. It argues that populist nationalism exposes a problem of internal dissensus on the future trajectories of solidarist international society, within the Western states that have traditionally been its principal supporters. The ‘populist moment’ reveals problems of disconnection between domestic publics, the practices, and institutions of contemporary international society, and state actions that are premised in part on ethical regard for non-citizens. The article contends that, as an interface point between rooted communities and global ethical concerns, progressive foreign policy approaches have an important role to play in ameliorating these disconnections. However, these approaches must look beyond a simple ‘re-booting’ of liberal internationalism, focussing instead on building a path towards solidarist international society that is rooted in everyday-lived experiences, communities, and identities within the state. Building upon theorizations of good international citizenship, the article advances an alternative framework of good global statehood, which draws upon a coproduction methodology as a means of creating progressive foreign policies that are better attuned to pluralism and diversity across, but also within state borders.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
构想良好的全球国家:民粹主义时刻后的进步外交政策
摘要本文利用英国学派的分析概念,探讨了在2010年代民粹主义民族主义兴起后,规范进步外交政策面临的理论挑战。它认为,民粹主义民族主义暴露了一个内部分歧的问题,即在传统上是其主要支持者的西方国家内部,团结主义国际社会的未来轨迹。“民粹主义时刻”揭示了国内公众、当代国际社会的实践和制度与部分以对非公民的道德尊重为前提的国家行动之间的脱节问题。文章认为,作为根深蒂固的社区和全球道德关切之间的接口点,进步的外交政策方法在改善这些脱节方面可以发挥重要作用。然而,这些方法必须超越简单的自由国际主义的“重新启动”,而是专注于建立一条植根于国家内部日常生活经历、社区和身份的通往团结国际社会的道路。在良好国际公民身份理论的基础上,文章提出了一个良好全球国家的替代框架,该框架借鉴了一种共同生产方法,作为制定进步外交政策的一种手段,这种政策更适合跨国界和跨国界的多元化和多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Editorial board International Theory (IT) is a peer reviewed journal which promotes theoretical scholarship about the positive, legal, and normative aspects of world politics respectively. IT is open to theory of absolutely all varieties and from all disciplines, provided it addresses problems of politics, broadly defined and pertains to the international. IT welcomes scholarship that uses evidence from the real world to advance theoretical arguments. However, IT is intended as a forum where scholars can develop theoretical arguments in depth without an expectation of extensive empirical analysis. IT’s over-arching goal is to promote communication and engagement across theoretical and disciplinary traditions. IT puts a premium on contributors’ ability to reach as broad an audience as possible, both in the questions they engage and in their accessibility to other approaches. This might be done by addressing problems that can only be understood by combining multiple disciplinary discourses, like institutional design, or practical ethics; or by addressing phenomena that have broad ramifications, like civilizing processes in world politics, or the evolution of environmental norms. IT is also open to work that remains within one scholarly tradition, although in that case authors must make clear the horizon of their arguments in relation to other theoretical approaches.
期刊最新文献
Direct measurements of luminal Ca 2+ with endo-lysosomal GFP-aequorin reveal functional IP 3 receptors. Law and politics from the sea ‘Getting Asia right’: de-essentializing China's hegemony in historical Asia Global international relations and the essentialism trap The United Nations of IR: power, knowledge, and empire in Global IR debates
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1