1. Sociology 2: Class 15: WPT, Realism Copyright © 2010 by Evan Schofer Do not copy or distribute without permission

2. Announcements Midterms returned during section this week Today’s class: World Polity Theory (WPT) Realism

3. Review: Theories of Globalization General perspectives on the economy Adam Smith Marx Keynesianism Sociological theories Modernization theory World Systems Theory (WST) / dependency theory World polity theory (WPT) / institutional theory Political Science Realism Institutionalism (Political science) / Interdependence Constructivism.

4. Review: World Polity Theory A theory of culture-based action In contrast to interest-based action Culture influences is via: Norms –Norms indicate proper behavior in a given situation Scripts –Taken-for-granted “recipes” for behavior Cognitive models –Maps or blueprints Issue: Might there be a “world culture” that influences people and governments? Do states govern on the bases of cognitive models?

5. Review: World Polity Theory World Polity = associations & culture in the international sphere –Observation: Participants in the international community share a common culture IGOs and NGOs are typically run by people educated in Western-style tradition, believe in common things –Example: Democracy, economic growth, education, etc –Observation: Societies have become quite similar in terms of government and policies –Called “isomorphism” Ex: Countries adopted similar education & legal systems, health policies, environmental laws, etc.

6. Review: World Polity Theory Idea: We think of states as “in charge”… but maybe they are influenced by culture –Central Claim: Features of the state derive from “worldwide models, constructed and propagated through global cultural and associational processes” –Meyer et al., p. 84 –“Worldwide models… define appropriate constitutions, goals, organization charts, ministry structures, and policies… Nation-states are imagined communities drawing on models that are lodged at the world level.” –Meyer et al., p. 88

7. Example of WPT Research Issue: Which countries have “pro- environmental” policies? The most developed? The ones with the worst pollution? Answer: –1. Most countries have begun to enact similar environmental laws… “isomorphism” or conformity –2. Those countries that are most connected to international organizations conform faster Those “linked” to the world polity are more exposed to global norms/culture…

8. World Polity Theory (WPT) Issue: Is World Polity Theory “right”? World polity theory is a new theory, but growing –1. World Polity research on isomorphism in government policy is considered compelling Convincing evidence that states are remarkably similar in many areas –Despite large differences in level of development and other factors that make similarity “surprising” WPT research finds isomorphism in many areas –Evolutions of education systems around the world –Understanding the success of the environmental movement –Also, lots of work on trends regarding human rights.

9. World Polity Theory (WPT) Issue: Is World Polity Theory “right”? –2. World Polity Theorists were first to realize the importance of INGOs in driving social change Other perspectives tended to ignore them… –3. The ideas behind WPT have garnered support in other areas –Called “neo-institutional theory” Especially the study of organizations This suggests potential… so people are working to apply its ideas to global issues.

10. World Polity Theory (WPT) Criticisms of World Polity Theory 1. It doesn’t address power This is intentional: WPT represents a “corrective”, emphasizing the influence of norms and culture –“the social sciences are reluctant to acknowledge patterns of influence and conformity that cannot be explained solely as matters of power or functional rationality.” But, colonial relations were historically important in defining Western ideas as the dominant ‘world’ culture Also, current global trends reflect US hegemony –WPT scholars point out that US doesn’t always benefit »e.g., when countries conform to US models of education –But, still it seems like power may be important.

11. World Polity Theory (WPT) Criticisms of World Polity Theory 2. It doesn’t sufficiently address actors or “agency” Again, this is an intentional goal of the theory… which has come under criticism Theory implies we are all controlled by a wider culture –Builds on Durkheim’s ideas of ‘collective consciousness’ Where is room for agency? How can it explain variability in the world?

12. World Polity Theory (WPT) Criticisms of WPT: 3. WPT explains government policies… but not life “on the ground” Conformity to world culture may be strategic (e.g,. to garner foreign aid) or very “thin” Ex: China may pretend to conform to global norms… but in fact that is just a façade –Interests, rather than culture are really driving behavior WPT scholars have begun responding to this criticism… but the issue is still being debated…

13. World Polity Theory (WPT) Bottom line: WPT is a fascinating theory – offers a whole new lens to view the world A very useful lens that explains some things that other theories can’t Also very useful for understanding organizations… –May be helpful if you start working for a big company –But, people interested in power/inequality find it very frustrating –It doesn’t directly address the issues they care most about Plus, it is a newer perspective… more evidence needed to fully evaluate it.

14. Realism Realism has been dominant in International Relations (poli sci) for 40 years Related term: Neo-realism… a variant… Central claim: State behavior is driven by the desire to survive and become more powerful Moreover, this occurs primarily through war and military competition Realism = even more cynical than WST.

15. Realism: Main Assumptions Basic assumptions of realism: Keohane and Nye, p. 20-1 1. States as coherent units are the dominant actors in world politics States are dominant – they are the most important entities in the international system Multi-nationals, IGOs, and INGOs are unimportant –Without an army or nuclear weapons, you’re nothing! Also, states are unitary actors (on international issues).

16. Realism: Main Assumptions 2. Military force (or threat of force) is the most effective means of wielding power The “strong” survive and prosper 3. The politics of “security” is what matters –“Security” = policies, plans, and preparations regarding war & national defense States use other policies, like economic sanctions or trade to get their way… but that is secondary Note: This disagrees with World-System Theory –WST claims that economic power = most important.

17. Realism Overall picture: States are constantly in a struggle for survival Definition: Anarchy: Lawlessness… absence of government or agreed upon rules/norms –Think Machiavelli… better to stab someone else in the back than get stabbed! Historically, weak states were taken over or colonized During the cold war, states made alliances with US or Soviet Union to avoid being taken over (or having governments “replaced”) Through force and alliances, states can make themselves secure and prosperous.

18. Realism Overall picture: The struggle for survival is paramount States are not “nice guys”… They lie, cheat, and steal to increase their power over others Example: Why did the US take over Iraq? –Is it to “liberate Iraqis”? – a realist would say NO! –We go to war to wipe out all enemies, gain as many resources as possible States use propaganda to cover what they do, but everything is a grab for more power.

19. Realism Realism differs from Marxism and WST –Marxism and WST argue that the system mainly benefits capitalists and that capitalists run the show Example: The Iraq war reflected the interests of oil companies, Halliburton, and military contractors… –Realism argues that states run the show… they have all the military power and make the decisions.

20. Realism Some argue that: U.S. policy on Iraq reflects (in part) policymakers who believe that realism is correct Ex: Condoleeza Rice, a former Poli Sci Professor (Though some realists have criticized the war…) –Realism suggests that the way to be safe is to maximize military dominance, defeat enemies Argument: by showing overwhelming power, the US will intimidate enemies (e.g., Syria) Plus, gain control of strategic resources like oil Result: US may be better of in the long run –Assuming the war didn’t bog down, sap resources, and make the US look feeble…

21. Realism: Criticisms Criticisms of Realism: 1. Like WST, it doesn’t make clear predictions All actions can be interpreted as reinforcing the theory You can always come up with an after-the-fact interpretation of actions as an attempt to increase power 2. Realism did not predict (nor does it often address) globalization in any of its forms Example: The EU has had a huge impact on politics and economics in Europe… but Realism mostly ignores it.

22. Realism: Criticisms 3. Perhaps military dominance isn’t such a big deal anymore –Are states still in a constant struggle for survival? It is hard to imagine Italy attacking Austria or Sweden attacking Britain In the 21 st century, many dominant nations have almost no military strength: Japan, most small European countries –Economic and social issues matter Maybe even norms…

23. Realism Bottom line: 1. Realism provides a very good explanation of warfare in the 1700s & 1800s Warfare was commonplace The international system was more like an anarchy States really were in a struggle for survival –2. Also, realists have the most sophisticated analyses of the Cold War Though newer perspectives are beginning to challenge this.

24. Realism Bottom line (continued): 3. The simple logic of realism is very attractive “Interest-based” explanations are highly intuitive… –BUT: lots of historical events are hard to explain from this perspective… Decline in territorial war, brute-force imperialism Emergence of the EU, dense webs of IGOs Examples where states appear to conform to norms –Ex: Many states are improving records on human rights, etc

25. Institutionalism / Interdependence Keohane and Nye: Institutionalism / Interdependence A critical response to realism Major claims: 1. Societies are interconnected in many ways Not just leaders and militaries, as realism suggests 2. States interact over many kinds of issues War and security isn’t the only issue Economics, environmental issues, etc., are also addressed.

26. Institutionalism / Interdependence 3. Military force is not central to inter-state relations Question: If military force doesn’t matter, what does? –Answer #1: International organizations They are the playing field of global politics –Answer #2: “Soft Power”: “Getting others to want the outcomes you want” (Nye p. 5) “Soft power rests on the ability to shape the preferences of others

27. Institutionalism / Interdependence 4. International organizations are the center of global politics They set agendas (e.g., trade, environmental issues) Within international organizations, states form coalitions and push for their interests –All states have an equal vote in most IGOs… so they barter and haggle. Result: world politics is a lot like national politics.

28. Institutionalism / Interdependence Claim: To study global politics, you have to study what goes on in international organizations Example: WTO policy A World-system theorist would predict that the WTO would always support interests of capitalists A Realist would ignore the WTO as irrelevant A Complex Interdependence scholar would examine coalitions, alliances, and votes to see what is going on.

29. Institutionalism / Interdependence Claim: “International organizations are frequently congenial institutions for weak states”… Keohane and Nye, p. 31 –Nations have equal voting power in most IGOs This allows small/weak nations to form powerful coalitions Ex: poor nations can sometimes block or influence WTO rules –Many IGOs support norms of equity Example: the UN uses money from wealthy countries to aid those in poverty.

30. Institutionalism / Interdependence Both realism and WST predict that weak nations will be mercilessly exploited & dominated Institutionalism / interdependence predicts otherwise Weak countries will be able to use international organizations to improve their situation Ex: Poor countries have negotiated for special treatment in many environmental treaties.

31. Institutionalism / Interdependence Realism and WST argue that all nations will look out for themselves (or capitalist classes) Ex: They will cheat on environmental treaties; They will build weapons of mass destruction Treaties and IGOs are inherently fragile… Powerful nations will ignore or abolish them when the are no longer useful Institutionalism / Interdependence: Through IGOs, countries can work for the collective good Complex Interdependence predicts that nations can improve the environment, eradicate WMD Ex: Non-proliferation treaty; Environmental treaties.

32. Institutionalism / Interdependence Criticisms of Institutionalism / Interdependence Summarized in article by Waltz –1. “The world is less interdependent than is usually supposed” Levels of trade aren’t much higher than in 1914, just before WWI; most MNCs are still rooted in one country. –2. Political/military power still matters US power holds up global institutions (IMF, World Bank) Ultimately, economics is subordinate to politics.