Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-28T07:11:36.364Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of Intranational and International Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Chadwick F. Alger
Chadwick F. Alger*
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The study of international relations has been considerably advanced in recent years by the application of findings from other areas of the social sciences. These have included decision-making, game theory, conflict, bargaining, communication, negotiation, systems, geography, attitudes, and simulation. International relations scholars such as Morton Kaplan, Charles McClelland, Richard C. Snyder, and Harold Sprout have built important bridges between international relations and other disciplines. It has been fortunate that such innovators have often found men from other disciplines, such as Kenneth Boulding, Harold Guetzkow, Charles Osgood, and Anatol Rapoport, in the middle of the bridge. The volumes of the Journal of Conflict Resolution offer one example of how far this remarkable effort at cross-fertilization has gone.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 57 , Issue 2 , June 1963 , pp. 406 - 419
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Useful discussion may be found in Deutsch, Karl, “The Place of Behavioral Sciences in Graduate Training in International Relations,” Behavioral Science, Vol. 3 (1958), pp. 278–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Singer, J. David, “Behavioral Sciences and International Relations,” Behavioral Science, Vol. 6 (1961), pp. 324–335CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; and Snyder, Richard C., “Some Recent Trends in International Relations Theory and Research,” in Austin Ranney, (ed.), Essays on the Behavioral Study of Politics (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1962), pp. 103–171Google Scholar.

2 “Political” is used here as a means for referring to the concerns of most political scientists. I agree with Dahl that customary political-nonpolitical distinctions may at times assume differences that do not exist. He concludes: “I do not think we have nearly enough evidence … (to conclude) that the differences among particular types of polyarchies, e.g., between nation states and trade-unions, are so great that it is not likely to be useful to include them in the same class.” Dahl, Robert A. in A Preface to Democratic Theory (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1956), p. 74Google Scholar.

3 This is not to say that the literature of international politics is not potentially useful to scholars working on other kinds of political phenomena. For a stimulating application of the work of Karl Deutsch, Ernst Haas and Morton Kaplan to metropolitan politics see Matthew Holden, “The Strategy of Metropolitan Integration: Three International Models,” unpublished paper, and “The Governance of the Metropolis as a Problem in Diplomacy,” a paper prepared for delivery at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D. C, September, 1962.

4 Riggs, Fred W., “International Relations as a Prismatic System,” World Politics, Vol. XIV (1961), p. 144CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Dulles, John Foster, “The Institutionalizing of Peace,” Address before the 50th Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law, 04 25, 1956 (Washington, D. C., Department of State, Public Services Division, Series S-No. 46, 1956), p. 3Google Scholar.

6 Morgenthau, Hans, Politics Among Nations (New York, Alfred Knopf, 1960), pp. 502–507Google Scholar.

7 Hoffmann, Stanley, Contemporary Theory in International Relations (Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, 1960), p. 206Google Scholar. Kaplan makes a similar point when he states that nations have “hundreds of thousands of cross-cutting social roles” but the international system has “only a small number of major actors or nation-states.” Kaplan, Morton, “Problems of Theory Building and Theory Confirmation in International Relations,” World Politics, Vol. XIV (1961), p. 14Google Scholar.

8 Kaplan, op. cil., p. 16.

9 Riggs, op. cit., p. 151.

10 See Kaplan, op. cit., p. 14; Kaplan, Morton and Katzenbach, Nicholas, The Political Foundations of International Law (New York, John Wiley, 1961), pp. 4, 7, 20, 235Google Scholar; Dyke, Vernon Van, International Politics (New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957), p. 14Google Scholar; and Waltz, Kenneth N., Man, War and the State (New York, Columbia University Press, 1959), p. 11Google Scholar.

11 See Hoffmann, op. cit., p. 206; Morgenthau, op. cit., pp. 501, 505; Schleicher, Charles P., International Relations: Conflict and Cooperation (New York, Prentice-Hall, 1962), pp. 259–260Google Scholar; Van Dyke, op. cit., p. 14; and Wright, Quincy, The Study of International Relations (New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1955), p. 134Google Scholar.

12 Van Dyke, op. cit., p. 14.

13 Riggs, op. cit., p. 151.

14 See Binder, Leonard, “The Middle East as a Subordinate System,” World Politics, Vol. X (1958), pp. 408–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar for a relevant discussion of “the inapplicability of the theory of bipolarity to Middle Eastern International politics” (p. 410).

15 Gabriel A. Almond indicates the same kind of bias in another area of political science when he reports that “the differences between Western and non-Western political systems have generally been exaggerated. This is in part due to the fact that the ‘limiting case’ models of the Western system, on the one hand, and of the traditional and primitive systems, on the other, have been greatly overdrawn.” In Almond, Gabriel and Coleman, James S., The Politics of the Developing Areas (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1960), p. 17Google Scholar.

16 Deutsch, Karlet al., Political Community in the North Atlantic Area (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1957), p. 5Google Scholar.

17 Hoffmann, op. cit., p. 3.

18 Deutsch et al., op. cit., 1957, p. 105.

19 Kaplan, op. cit., p. 14.

20 Wolfers, Arnold, “The Actors in International Politics,” Theoretical Aspects of International Relations (Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press, 1959), p. 102Google Scholar.

21 Riggs, op. cit., p. 151.

22 Haas, Ernst, “The Challenge of Regionalism,” International Organization, Vol. 12 (1958), p. 452CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Ibid., p. 454.

24 Almond and Coleman, op. cit., p. v. The parts of The Politics of Developing Areas most useful to this discussion are the Introduction (by Almond, pp. 3-64) and the Conclusion (by Coleman, pp. 532-576). In these chapters the editors generalize about data provided by other contributors in the chapters that fall between on the politics of Southeast Asia, South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, Near East, and Latin America. Citation of this book will hereafter be to Almond or Coleman separately, although all of the contributors and others collaborated in the development of the analytic approach of these chapters.

25 Coleman, op. cit., pp. 535-536.

26 Kertesz, Stephen, “Diplomacy in the Atomic Age,” Review of Politics, Vol. 21 (1959), pp. 151–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See, for example, Nicolson, Harold Sir, The Evolution of Diplomatic Method (New York, Macmillan, 1954), p. 120Google Scholar.

27 Thayer, Charles W., Diplomat (New York, Harper, 1959), p. 112Google Scholar.

28 Jackson, Henry M., “Do We Rely Too Much on the U.N.?” New York Times Magazine, 04 1, 1962, p. 110Google Scholar.

29 Loc. cit.

30 Sulzberger, C. L., New York Times, 08 13, 1962, p. 24Google Scholar.

31 Cardozo, Michael H., Diplomats in International Cooperation, Stepchildren of the Foreign Service (Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1962), p. xiGoogle Scholar.

32 Ibid., p. 121.

33 Almond, op. cit., p. 17. Dahl makes an even stronger plea for the importance of what he terms “social variables” in an eloquent paragraph which concludes: “… the first and crucial variables to which political scientists must direct their attention are social and not constitutional.” In Dahl, op. cit., p. 83.

34 Almond, op. cit., p. 28.

35 Cardozo, op. cit., p. 120.

36 Toward a Stronger Foreign Service, Report of the Secretary of State's Committee on Personnel (Washington, D. C., Department of State, Pub. 5458, 1954), p. 13Google Scholar. See the Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs Personnel, Personnel for the New Diplomacy (Washington, D. C., Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1962), especially pp. 54–55Google Scholar, for a more recent commentary on the prejudice of the United States Foreign Service against “specialists.”

37 Coleman, op. cit., p. 547.

38 Spaak, Paul-Henri, “The Experiment of Collective Security,” in Perspective on Peace, 1910-1960 (New York, Praeger, 1960), pp. 84–85Google Scholar.

39 Alger, Chadwick F., “Participation in the United Nations as a Learning Experience,” Public Opinion Quarterly, forthcoming, 1963Google Scholar.

40 Almond, op. cit., p. 40.

41 Coleman, op. cit., p. 548.

42 Almond, op. cit., p. 34.

43 Coleman, op. cit., p. 548.

44 Loc. Cit.

45 Loc. cit.

46 Haas, op. cit., pp. 451-452.

47 Stein, Eric, “The European Parliamentary Assembly: Techniques of Emerging ‘Political Control’,“ International Organization, Vol. XIII (1959), pp. 235Google Scholar.

48 Marcy, Carl and Hansen, Norella, “A Note on American Participation in Interparliamentary Meetings,” International Organization, Vol. XIII (1959), p. 438Google Scholar.

49 Coleman, op. cit., p. 557.

50 Loc. cit.

51 Loc. cit.

52 For a provocative account of the independence of the Office of Public Information of the United Nations, see Gordenker, Leon, “Policy-Making and Secretariat Influence in the U.N.,” American Political Science Review, Vol. LIV (1960), pp. 359–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar. He reports: “Repeated attacks have left OPI almost unaltered, either in form or function” (p. 371). “The ability of the Secretariat to return from the General Assembly time after time with a renewed mandate to carry out its own public information program reflects real influence” (p. 373).

53 Almond, op. cit., p. 48.

54 Fortes, M. and Evans-Pritchard, E. E., African Political Systems (New York, Oxford, 1940, reprinted 1961), p. xiGoogle Scholar.

55 Mair, Lucy, Primitive Government (Baltimore, Penguin Books, 1962), p. 9Google Scholar.

56 Mair, op. cit.; Fortes and Evans-Pritchard, op. cit.; Schapera, Isaac, Government and Politics in Tribal Societies (London, Watts, 1956)Google Scholar; Middleton, John and Tate, David, Tribes Without Rulers (London, Rutledge and K. Paul, 1958)Google Scholar.

57 Gluckman, Max, “Political Institutions,” in The Institutions of Primitive Society (Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1954), p. 66Google Scholar.

58 Mair, op. cit. p. 9.

59 MacIver, Robert, The Web of Government (New York, Macmillan, 1948), p. 156Google Scholar.

60 Gluckman, op. cit., pp. 66-67.

61 Easton, David, “Political Anthropology,” in Siegel, Bernard J. (ed.), Biennial Review of Anthropology (Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1959) p. 235Google Scholar.

62 Ibid., p. 236.

63 Ibid., p. 237.

64 Ibid., p. 246.

65 Ibid., p. 218.

66 Almond, op. cit., p. 7.

67 Weber, Max, “Politics as a Vocation,” in Gerth, and Mills, , From Max Weber (New York, Oxford, 1958), p. 78Google Scholar.

68 Loc. cit.

69 See Schapera, op. cit., pp. 94-95, for a review of anthropological literature in which this definition is used.

70 Malinowski, Bronislaw, Scientific Theory of Culture (Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1944), p. 165Google Scholar.

71 In Fortes and Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., p. xiv.

72 Lowie, R. H., “Some Aspects of Political Organization Among American Aborigines,” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 78 (1948), p. 11Google Scholar.

73 Schapera, op. cit., p. 217.

74 Ibid., p. 218. Almond is mistaken when he says that Schapera “does not offer an alternative definition” of “politics” (Almond, op. cit., p. 5).

75 Schapera, op. cit. p. 217.

76 Ibid., p. 218.

77 Ibid., p. 220.

78 Easton, op. cit., p. 245. This work includes a very useful annotated bibliography of political anthropology prepared by John D. McCaffrey.

79 This is in agreement with Deutsch's findings in his study of ten cases of attempted political integration in the North Atlantic area during the past five centuries. In Deutsch, op. cit., 1957, pp. 25-26.

80 Gluckman, Max, Custom and Conflict in Africa (Glencoe, Ill., The Free Press, 1955), p. 4Google Scholar.

81 Ross, Edward A., The Principles of Sociology (New York, Century Co., 1920), p. 164Google Scholar.

82 Coser, Lewis, The Functions of Social Conflict (Glencoe, Ill., The Free Press, 1956), pp. 75–80Google Scholar.

83 Simmel, Georg, Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations (Glencoe, Ill., The Free Press, 1955), pp. 146–161Google Scholar.

84 Morgenthau, op. cit., p. 504.

85 Gluckman, op. cit., 1954, p. 74.

86 Fortes and Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., p. 14.

87 Peristiany, John G., “Law,” in The Institutions of Primitive Society (Glencoe, Ill., The Free Press, 1956), p. 40Google Scholar.

88 Gluckman, op. cit., 1954, p. 68.

89 Thomas, Hovet Jr., “Political Parties in the United Nations,” Paper prepared for 1962 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D. C., 09 1962, p. 6Google Scholar.

90 For a useful discussion of definitions of politics, see Easton, op. cit., pp. 213-227. Easton concludes that the “legitimate use of force” to identify politics “is an approach that research in American political science has all but abandoned, although it still has enough vitality to raise its head from time to time” (pp. 218-219).