Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-15T23:59:47.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Study of International Politics: A Survey of Trends and Developments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Kenneth W. Thompson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The question was raised at the end of World War II as to whether or not international relations could stand as a separate field of study. Views were expressed by scholars and teachers in history and political science to the effect that in substance there was nothing peculiar to the subject matter of international relations which did not fall under other separate fields of social studies. At some universities and colleges there were dissenters to this prevailing viewpoint. Their particular philosophy manifested itself in attempts to create and establish integrated curricula under academic committees or departments dedicated to the broad generalized study of die subject matter of the field. It is still too early to pass judgment with any finality on the merits of these two points of view, the one viewing international relations as a mere duplication of the subject matter of many fields; the odier insisting that diere must be an ordering and integrative approach to die field. No serious student would presume to claim that die study of international relations had arrived at die stage of an independent academic discipline. However, there have been three significant developments within no more than a single generation which illuminate certain aspects of this problem. First we have witnessed the evolution and development of a point of focus or core in the field. Secondly, diere have been die first faint and feeble beginnings of attempts to create a mediodology appropriate for the field, or at least to determine those related mediodologies in the social sciences whose methods and techniques could most usefully be appropriated for the study of persistent international issues. Thirdly, inventories have been drawn up by individual scholars, universities and institutes, of topics and concrete projects which would best serve in the development of general principles in the field and the validation of them dirough systematic inquiry.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , October 1952 , pp. 433 - 467
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1952

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 Gurian, Waldemar, “The Study of International Relations,” Review of Politics, Vol. 8, No. 3 (07, 1946), pp. 275–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Leopold, Richard W., “The Problem of American Intervention, 1917: An Historical Retrospect,” World Politics, Vol. 2, No. 3, (04, 1950), pp. 404–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Fox, William T. R., “Interwar International Relations Research: The American Experience,” World Politics, Vol. 2, No. 1 (10, 1949), pp. 67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The present writer is especially indebted to the author of this article.

4 Ibid.

5 Kirk, Grayson, The Study of International Relations. (New York: Council of Foreign Relations, 1947.)Google Scholar

6 Examples of the old school of thought may be found in such volumes as Eagleton, Clyde, International GovernmentGoogle Scholar and Woolf, L. S., International Government. (New York: Brentano's, 1916.)Google Scholar

The “political approach” to international government is developed most fully in the writings of Professors William T. R. Fox and Hans J. Morgenthau. Other selections include Brierly, J. L., The Covenant and the Charter (Cambridge: The University Press, 1947)Google Scholar and Briggs, Herbert W. “Power Politics and International Organization,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 39, No. 4 (10, 1945), pp. 664–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics Among Nations. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1948)Google Scholar; Schuman, Frederick L., International Politics. Fourth Edition. (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1948)Google Scholar; Schwarzenberger, Georg, Power Politics. Second Revised Edition. (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, Inc., 1951.)Google Scholar

8 Herz, John H., Political Realism and Political Idealism; A Study in Theories and Realities. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951)Google Scholar; Webster, C. K., The Study of International Politics. (Cardiff: University of Wales Press Board, 1923.)Google Scholar

9 Kennan, George F., American Diplomacy, 1900–50. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951.)Google Scholar

10 Here, op. cit.

11 Kennan, , op. cit., pp. 95–6.Google Scholar

12 Ibid., p. 96.

13 Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). House of Commons. Vol. 408, 02 28, 1945, pp. 1458–9.Google Scholar

14 Schwarzenberger, , op. cit., pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

15 Ibid., p. 5.

16 Butterfield, Herbert, “The Tragic Element in Modern International Conflict,” Review of Politics, Vol. 12, No. 2 (04, 1950), pp. 147–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Carr, E. H., Conditions of Peace (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1944)Google Scholar; Morgenthau, Hans J., Scientific Man vs. Power Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946)Google Scholar; Niebuhr, Reinhold, Christianity and Power Politics (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1940)Google Scholar; “Democracy as a Religion,” Christianity and Crisis, Vol. 7, No. 14 (08 4, 1947), pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

17 See, for instance, Mr. Cordell Hull's comment on his return from Moscow Conference in 1943 as cited in the New York Times, 11 19, 1943, p. 1.Google Scholar

18 Morgenthau, Hans J. and Thompson, Kenneth W., Principles and Problems of International Politics (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1950), pp. 33–41.Google Scholar

19 Stevenson, Adlai E., Korea in Perspective (Stamford, Connecticut: The Over-brook Press, 1952), p. 16.Google Scholar

20 Burke, Edmund, “Remarks on the Policy of the Allies with Respect to France,” (1793), Works (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1889), Vol. IV, p. 447.Google Scholar

21 Butterfield, , op. cit.Google Scholar

22 Carr, E. H., The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919–1939 (London: Macmillan and Company, 1949), p. 89.Google Scholar

23 SirZimmern, Alfred, “Introductory Report to the Discussions in 1935,” University Teaching of International Relations, ed. by SirZimmern, Alfred (Paris: International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, League of Nations, 1939), p. 8.Google Scholar

24 Spykman, Nicholas J., “Methods of Approach to the Study of International Relations,” Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of Teachers of International Law and Related Subjects, pp. 60–69.Google Scholar

25 Morgenthau, , Politics Among Nations, op. cit.Google Scholar

27 Kirk, , “Materials For the Study of International Relations,” World Politics, Vol. 1, No. 3 (04, 1949), pp. 426–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26 Kirk, , op. cit.Google Scholar

28 Dunn, Frederick S., “The Scope of International Relations,” World Politics, Vol. 1, No. 1 (10, 1948), pp. 142–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Statement of Objectives of the Center for the Study of American Foreign Policy, The University of Chicago, Director, Hans J. Morgenthau.