{"title":"国际社会的腐败?从业人员视角下的全面彻底裁军","authors":"Laust Schouenborg","doi":"10.1177/13540661221102930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates whether practitioners argued that general and complete disarmament (GCD) would corrupt international society during the two major debates of this issue in the 20th century, namely in 1927–1928 and 1959. The purpose and value of this analysis is to learn more about the workings of international society. Following Bull and other English School scholars, GCD probably represents the most radical challenge to the traditional conception of international society and its institutions. The only challenge of similar magnitude would appear to be the creation of a universal state or world government, fundamentally removing anarchy from the ‘anarchical society’. The article thus investigates whether those concerns about corruption, raised by scholars, resonate with the expressed public opinion of practitioners – diplomats and statesmen – in the actual deliberation of GCD in international fora: the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, 1927–1928, and the United Nations, 1959. The main finding is that the corruption argument does appear in these public deliberations, and in intriguing and complex ways. The article thus offers a novel analysis of how practitioners publicly deal with a supposedly radical challenge to international society.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"28 1","pages":"616 - 639"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The corruption of international society? General and complete disarmament from the perspective of the practitioners\",\"authors\":\"Laust Schouenborg\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13540661221102930\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article investigates whether practitioners argued that general and complete disarmament (GCD) would corrupt international society during the two major debates of this issue in the 20th century, namely in 1927–1928 and 1959. The purpose and value of this analysis is to learn more about the workings of international society. Following Bull and other English School scholars, GCD probably represents the most radical challenge to the traditional conception of international society and its institutions. The only challenge of similar magnitude would appear to be the creation of a universal state or world government, fundamentally removing anarchy from the ‘anarchical society’. The article thus investigates whether those concerns about corruption, raised by scholars, resonate with the expressed public opinion of practitioners – diplomats and statesmen – in the actual deliberation of GCD in international fora: the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, 1927–1928, and the United Nations, 1959. The main finding is that the corruption argument does appear in these public deliberations, and in intriguing and complex ways. The article thus offers a novel analysis of how practitioners publicly deal with a supposedly radical challenge to international society.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of International Relations\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"616 - 639\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of International Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221102930\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221102930","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The corruption of international society? General and complete disarmament from the perspective of the practitioners
This article investigates whether practitioners argued that general and complete disarmament (GCD) would corrupt international society during the two major debates of this issue in the 20th century, namely in 1927–1928 and 1959. The purpose and value of this analysis is to learn more about the workings of international society. Following Bull and other English School scholars, GCD probably represents the most radical challenge to the traditional conception of international society and its institutions. The only challenge of similar magnitude would appear to be the creation of a universal state or world government, fundamentally removing anarchy from the ‘anarchical society’. The article thus investigates whether those concerns about corruption, raised by scholars, resonate with the expressed public opinion of practitioners – diplomats and statesmen – in the actual deliberation of GCD in international fora: the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, 1927–1928, and the United Nations, 1959. The main finding is that the corruption argument does appear in these public deliberations, and in intriguing and complex ways. The article thus offers a novel analysis of how practitioners publicly deal with a supposedly radical challenge to international society.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of International Relations publishes peer-reviewed scholarly contributions across the full breadth of the field of International Relations, from cutting edge theoretical debates to topics of contemporary and historical interest to scholars and practitioners in the IR community. The journal eschews adherence to any particular school or approach, nor is it either predisposed or restricted to any particular methodology. Theoretically aware empirical analysis and conceptual innovation forms the core of the journal’s dissemination of International Relations scholarship throughout the global academic community. In keeping with its European roots, this includes a commitment to underlying philosophical and normative issues relevant to the field, as well as interaction with related disciplines in the social sciences and humanities. This theoretical and methodological openness aims to produce a European journal with global impact, fostering broad awareness and innovation in a dynamic discipline. Adherence to this broad mandate has underpinned the journal’s emergence as a major and independent worldwide voice across the sub-fields of International Relations scholarship. The Editors embrace and are committed to further developing this inheritance. Above all the journal aims to achieve a representative balance across the diversity of the field and to promote deeper understanding of the rapidly-changing world around us. This includes an active and on-going commitment to facilitating dialogue with the study of global politics in the social sciences and beyond, among others international history, international law, international and development economics, and political/economic geography. The EJIR warmly embraces genuinely interdisciplinary scholarship that actively engages with the broad debates taking place across the contemporary field of international relations.