大卫·钱德勒对国际关系中的弹性思维与政治现实主义的分析

N. Gudalov
{"title":"大卫·钱德勒对国际关系中的弹性思维与政治现实主义的分析","authors":"N. Gudalov","doi":"10.21638/11701/spbu06.2019.104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Resilience is an increasingly popular concept used to explore how systems respond to various challenges. It has been actively used in International Relations. Here, resilience has been analyzed in predominantly postmodernist terms. Yet, I take resilience-thinking, as explored by one of its leading scholars, David Chandler, and show that it has some affinities with political realism, understood, contra stereotypes, as a complex tradition of political reflection. I also apply the insights gained to the recent overarching turn to resilience in the EU’s external action. The article demonstrates that the novel stress of resilience-thinking on the complexity of the contemporary world is very important, but that it is useful to contextualize it and relate it, if in part, to the age-old concerns of the realist tradition, and to identify similar strengths and problems in both approaches. Both resilience-thinking and realism have drawn our attention to the plural aspect of politics. However, they may face problems concerning elements of relativism, a claim to know the ‘reality’ best, the use of fixed categories, irresponsibility, and the reification of an understanding of reality as a permanent crisis. All these strengths and problems will likely play out in the EU’s external action and even its internal development.","PeriodicalId":336122,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International relations","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"David Chandler’s analysis of resilience-thinking and political realism in international relation\",\"authors\":\"N. Gudalov\",\"doi\":\"10.21638/11701/spbu06.2019.104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Resilience is an increasingly popular concept used to explore how systems respond to various challenges. It has been actively used in International Relations. Here, resilience has been analyzed in predominantly postmodernist terms. Yet, I take resilience-thinking, as explored by one of its leading scholars, David Chandler, and show that it has some affinities with political realism, understood, contra stereotypes, as a complex tradition of political reflection. I also apply the insights gained to the recent overarching turn to resilience in the EU’s external action. The article demonstrates that the novel stress of resilience-thinking on the complexity of the contemporary world is very important, but that it is useful to contextualize it and relate it, if in part, to the age-old concerns of the realist tradition, and to identify similar strengths and problems in both approaches. Both resilience-thinking and realism have drawn our attention to the plural aspect of politics. However, they may face problems concerning elements of relativism, a claim to know the ‘reality’ best, the use of fixed categories, irresponsibility, and the reification of an understanding of reality as a permanent crisis. All these strengths and problems will likely play out in the EU’s external action and even its internal development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":336122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International relations\",\"volume\":\"92 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu06.2019.104\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu06.2019.104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

弹性是一个越来越流行的概念,用于探索系统如何应对各种挑战。它在国际关系中得到了积极的应用。在这里,人们主要用后现代主义的术语来分析弹性。然而,我以由其主要学者之一大卫·钱德勒(David Chandler)所探索的弹性思维为例,表明它与政治现实主义有一些相似之处,被理解为一种复杂的政治反思传统,与刻板印象相反。我还将这些见解应用于最近欧盟对外行动的总体转向弹性。本文表明,弹性思维对当代世界复杂性的新强调是非常重要的,但将其置于背景中并将其部分地与现实主义传统的古老关切联系起来,并确定两种方法中相似的优势和问题是有用的。弹性思维和现实主义都把我们的注意力吸引到了政治的多元方面。然而,他们可能会面临一些问题,包括相对主义的元素、声称最了解“现实”、使用固定的范畴、不负责任,以及把对现实的理解具体化为一种永久的危机。所有这些优势和问题都可能在欧盟的对外行动甚至内部发展中发挥作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
David Chandler’s analysis of resilience-thinking and political realism in international relation
Resilience is an increasingly popular concept used to explore how systems respond to various challenges. It has been actively used in International Relations. Here, resilience has been analyzed in predominantly postmodernist terms. Yet, I take resilience-thinking, as explored by one of its leading scholars, David Chandler, and show that it has some affinities with political realism, understood, contra stereotypes, as a complex tradition of political reflection. I also apply the insights gained to the recent overarching turn to resilience in the EU’s external action. The article demonstrates that the novel stress of resilience-thinking on the complexity of the contemporary world is very important, but that it is useful to contextualize it and relate it, if in part, to the age-old concerns of the realist tradition, and to identify similar strengths and problems in both approaches. Both resilience-thinking and realism have drawn our attention to the plural aspect of politics. However, they may face problems concerning elements of relativism, a claim to know the ‘reality’ best, the use of fixed categories, irresponsibility, and the reification of an understanding of reality as a permanent crisis. All these strengths and problems will likely play out in the EU’s external action and even its internal development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Foreign economic cooperation between St. Petersburg and Denmark in the 21st century: Main trends, problems, prospects The pandemic, Russia and the West Russian — US public diplomacy: Comparative aspects and dialogue prospects Conferences on political modeling: Simulating European Union — Eurasian Economic Union negotiations Russian-American relations in a changing world: A new contribution to the discussion on the future of international order
×
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