1 Allison Graham, Essence of Decision (Boston: Little Brown, 1971).
2 Waltz Kenneth, “Theory of International Relations,” in Greenstein Fred and Polsby Nelson, eds., Handbook of Political Science international Relations (Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley, 1975), vol. 8, pp. 1–86.
3 Schumann Franz, The Logic of World Power (New York: Pantheon, 1974).
4 Gourevitch Peter, “International Trade, Domestic Coalitions and Liberty: Comparative Responses to the Crisis of 1873–1896,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History, VIII: 2 (Autumn 1977): 281–313.
5 Huntington Samuel, “Transnational Organizations,” World Politics, 25 (04 1973): 338–368.
6 Gerschenkron Alexander, “Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective,” in Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Cambridge: Harvard U.P., 1963). See Kurth's James very brilliant extension of Gershenkron, combining his with other lines of reasoning, “The Political Consequences of the Product Cycle: Industrial History and Comparative Politics,” International Organization (forthcoming) and his equally brilliant essay “Delayed Development and European Politics” (mimeo, 1977) part of which will appear as an essay in a forthcoming volume on Latin America, edited by David Collier, sponsored by the Joint Committee on Latin American Studies of the Social Science Research Council.
7 Hobsbawm E.J., Industry and Empire (Baltimore: Penguin, 1970); Landes D.J., The Unbound Prometheus (Oxford: Oxford U.P., 1969).
8 Carsten F., The Origins of Prussia (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968); Hamerow T., Revolution, Restoration, Reaction (Princeton: Princeton U.P., 1958); Clapham J.H., Economic Development of France and Germany, 4th edition (Cambridge: Cambridge U.P., 1935).
9 Moore Barrington Jr, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston: Little, Brown, 1966), pp. 413–44. For a critique of Moore directed at the failure to develop sufficiently an “intersocial perspective,” see Skocpol Theda, “A Critical Review of Barrington Moore's Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy,” Politics and Society (Fall 1973): 1–34.
10 Hirschman Albert, “The Political Economy of Import Substituting Industrialization in Latin America,” in A Bias for Hope (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971), pp. 85–123, and “The Turn to Authoritarianism in Latin America and the Search for Its Economic Determinants,” in the forthcoming volume on Latin America edited by Collier David, and “A Generalized Linkage Approach to Development, with Special Reference to Staples,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 25 (Supplement 1977): 67–98.
11 O'Donnell Guillermo, Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism (Berkeley: University of California, Institute for International Studies, Politics of Modernization Series, no. 9, 1973) and “Reflections on the General Tendencies of Change in Bureaucratic-Authoritarian States,” Latin American Research Review, forthcoming.
12 Kurth James, “Patrimonial Authority, Delayed Development, and Mediterranean Politics,” American Political Science Association (New Orleans, 1973) and “Political Consequences of the Product Cycle,” and “Delayed Development and European Politics.”.
13 Frank Andre Gunder, Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1967).
14 Wallerstein Immanuel, The Modern World System (New York: The Academic Press, 1974).
15 Gourevitch Peter, “The International System and Regime Formation: A Critical Review of Anderson and Wallerstein,” Comparative Politics (04 1978): 419–438. See American Journal of Sociology 82 (03 1977) for reviews of Anderson by Michael Hechter and Wallerstein by Theda Skocpol, and my review for a large number of other citations.
16 Cardoso Ferdinand Enrique, “Associated Dependent Development: Theoretical and Practical Implications,” in Stepan Alfred, ed., Authoritarian Brazil (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973), and ”Industrialization, Dependency and Power in Latin America,” Berkeley Journal of Sociology, XVII (1972). The most frequently cited of Cardoso's untranslated works is that written with Faleto E., Dependencia y desarrollo en America Latina (Santiago: II Pes, 1967). An interesting “dependentdevelopment” literature on non-Third World countries has also developed, such as that on Canada. See Naylor Tom, “The Third Commercial Empire of the St. Lawrence,” in Teeple Gary, ed., Economics and the National Question (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1972), pp. 1–42; Laux Jeanne, “Global Interdependence and State Intervention,” in Tomlin Brian, ed. Canada's Foreign Policy: Analysis and Trends (Toronto: Methuen, 1978), pp. 110–135; Levitt Kari, The Silent Surrender (Toronto: Macmillan, 1970).
17 For an excellent discussion of liberal “diffusion” and “dependencia” or colonial models, see Hechter Michael, Internal Colonialism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976).
18 Keohane Robert and Nye Joseph, eds., Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge: Harvard U.P., 1971), and Power and Interdependence (Boston: Little Brown, 1977); Morse Edward, Modernization and the Transformation of International Relations (New York: Free Press, 1976). For criticism, see Waltz Kenneth, “The Myth of National Interdependence,” in Kindleberger Charles P., ed., The International Corporation (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1970).
19 Allison Graham, “Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” American Political Science Review LXIII (09 1970). Not surprisingly, these debates relate to changes in reality: realism dominated in a period of war and military confrontations; the easing of Cold War tensions and greater fluidity in international relations meant the system was less plausibly constraining, hence the disaggregating of the state through bureaucratic analysis; the salience of international economic issues in the seventies led to even further disaggregation, and even further downgrading of military and state-centered views.
20 Nye and Keohane, Power and Interdependence.
21 Morse, Modernization and the Transformation of International Relations.
22 Gilpin Robert, US Power and the Multinational Corporation (New York: Basic Books, 1975); Gilpin, “Three Models of the Future,” International Organization, 29 (Winter 1975): 37–60; Krasner Steven, “State Power and the Structure of International Trade,” World Politics XXVIII (04 1976): 317–347, is not clear as to the balance between economic and military dimensions in the definition of a hegemonic power.
23 Magdoff Harry, The Age of Imperialism (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1969); Baran Paul and Sweezy Paul, Monopoly Capital (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1968).
24 Franz Schurmann, The Logic of World Power.
25 Krasner Steven, “The Great Oil Sheikdown,” Foreign Policy 13 (Winter 1973–1974): 123–138.
26 Hintze Otto, “Military Organization and the Organization of the State,” in The Historical Essays of Otto Hintze, Gilbert Felix, ed. (New York: Oxford, 1975), pp. 178–215.
31 Anderson Perry, Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism and Lineages of the Absolutist State (LondonNew Left Books, 1974).
32 Rokkan Stein, “Dimensions of State Formation and State-Building,” in Tilly Charles, ed., The Formation of National States in Western Europe (Princeton: Princeton U.P., 1975), pp. 562–600.
33 Finer Samuel, “State Building, State Boundaries and Border Control,” Social Sciences Information, 13 (4/5): 79–126.
34 Rokkan Stein and Lipset S.M., “Introduction,” Party Systems and Voter Alignments (New York: Free Press, 1967).
35 Hirschman Albert, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty (Cambridge: Harvard U.P., 1970).
36 Hoffmann Stanley, Primacy of World Order: American Foreign Policy Since the Cold War (New York: McGraw Hill, 1978).
37 Kaiser Karl, German Foreign Policy in Transition (London: Oxford U.P., 1968).
38 See the excellent study by Skocpol Theda, “France, Russia, China: A Structural Analysis of Social Revolutions,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 18 (04 1976): 175–210. See also her book on revolutions to be published by Oxford University Press.
39 Kenneth Waltz, “Theory of International Relations.” By non-reductionist, Waltz means an explanation of international politics at the system level, third rather than second image. Here I am extending the word to distinguish between endogenous and exogenous explanations of regime type.
40 Besides works already cited, see: Jervis Robert, Perception and Misperceplion in International Politics (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton U.P., 1976); Steinbrunner John, The Cybernetic Theory of Decision: New Dimensions of Political Analysis (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton U.P., 1974); Brecher Michael, The Foreign Policy System of Israel: Setting, Images, Processes (New Haven: Yale U.P., 1972); Brecher Michael, Decisions in Israel's Foreign Policy (New Haven: Yale U.P., 1975). See also Wagner R. Harrison, “Dissolving the State: Three Recent Perspectives on International Relations,” International Organization 28 (Summer, 1974): 335–466.
41 Krasner Stephen, Raw Materials Investment and American Foreign Policy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, forthcoming); Katzenstein Peter, “Introduction” and “Conclusion” to “Between Power and Plenty: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States,” International Organization 31 (Autumn 1977) and “International Relations and Domestic Structures: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States,” International Organization 30 (Winter 1976); Hoffmann Stanley, “The State: For What Society,” Decline or Renewal (New York: Viking Press, 1974); Andrews Bruce, “Surplus Security and National Security: State Policy as Domestic Social Action,” International Studies Association, Washington, D.C., 02 22–26, 1978. John Zysman has some astute comments about the connection between institutional form and the content of policy toward international competition in his study of the French electronics industry: Political Strategies for Industrial Order (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977).
42 Katzenstein, International Organization articles.
43 Bachrach Peter and Baratz Morton, “Decisions and Non-decisions: An Analytic Framework,” American Political Science Review 57 (1963).
44 Whether being open or closed, or having strength or weakness can be systematically linked to the content of politics is much less clear. Attention to such variables makes the most sense in looking at the characteristics of decisions other than their actual content: coherence of a series of decisions, say, about tariffs, rather than the actual level.
45 Wehler Hans-Ulrich “Bismarck's Imperialism, 1862–1890”, Past and Present 48 (1970): 119–155. Leopold Ranke is the most noted exponent of the primacy of “foreign policy” school. See von Laue Theodore, Ranke Leopold, The Formative Years (Princeton: Princeton U.P., 1970). Also the comments by Morse in Modernization and the Transformation of International Relations.
46 Smith Paul, Disraelian Conservatism and Social Reform (London: 1967); Blake Robert, Disraeli (New York: 1966). Kahler Miles, “Decolonization: Domestic Sources of External Policy, External Sources of Domestic Politics,” Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University, 1977.
47 Franz Schurmann, The Logic of World Power.
48 See the very interesting and growing neo-Marxist literature on the state such as: Bloch Fred, “The Ruling Class does not Rule: Notes on the Marxist Theory of the State,” Social Revolution 33 (05–06 1977): 6–28; Gold David, Lo Clarence, and Wright Erik Olin, “Recent Developments in Marxist Theories of the Capitalist State,” parts 1 and 2, Monthly Review (10 and 11 1975); Offe Klaus, “Structural Problems of the Capitalist State,” von Beyme Klaus, ed., German Political Studies, (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1976); Offe Klaus and Ronge Volker, “Theses on the Theory of the State,” New German Critique 6 (Fall 1975); O'Connor James, Fiscal Crisis of the State (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1973).
49 Craig Gordon, The Politics of the Prussian Army (Oxford: Oxford U.P., 1964).