Book contents
- The Historicity of International Politics
- The Historicity of International Politics
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I The Imperial Past and Present in International Politics and IR
- Part II Historical Sociology and the Imperial Fundaments of International Politics
- Part III Global History and the Imperial Fundaments of International Politics
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Conclusion
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 June 2023
Book contents
- The Historicity of International Politics
- The Historicity of International Politics
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I The Imperial Past and Present in International Politics and IR
- Part II Historical Sociology and the Imperial Fundaments of International Politics
- Part III Global History and the Imperial Fundaments of International Politics
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Historicity of International PoliticsImperialism and the Presence of the Past, pp. 289 - 302Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Achen, C. H. (2002). Toward a New Political Methodology: Microfoundations and ART, Annual Review of Political Science, 5, 423–50.Google Scholar
Barkawi, T., Bell, D. & Zarakol, A. (forthcoming). What Is ‘Historicism’?, in Goddard, S., Lawson, G. & Sending, O. J. (eds.). Oxford Handbook of International Political Sociology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. (2017). Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain, in Bevir, Mark (ed.). Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bially Mattern, J. & Zarakol, A. (2016). Hierarchies in World Politics, International Organization, 70(3), 623–54.Google Scholar
Braumoeller, B. & Sartori, A. E. (2004). The Promise and Perils of Statistics in International Relations, in Sprinz, D. & Wolinsky, Y. (eds.). Models, Numbers, and Cases: Methods for Studying International Relations, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Buzan, B. & Little, R. (2001). Why International Relations Has Failed as an Intellectual Project and What to Do about It, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 30(1), 19–39.Google Scholar
Çapan, Z. G. & Zarakol, A. (2018). Between ‘East’ and ‘West’: Travelling Theories, Travelling Imaginations, in Gofas, A., Hamati-Ataya, I. & Onuf, N. (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of the History, Philosophy and Sociology of International Relations. London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Freeman, B., Kim, D. G. & Lake, D. A. (2022). Race in International Relations: Beyond the ‘Norm Against Noticing’, Annual Review of Political Science, May. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051820-120746.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, S. (1977). An American Social Science: International Relations, Daedalus, 106(3), 41–60.Google Scholar
King, G., Keohane, R. O. & Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lake, D. (2011). Hierarchy in International Relations, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Mearsheimer, J. J. & Walt, S. M. (2013). Leaving Theory Behind: Why Simplistic Hypothesis Testing Is Bad for International Relations, European Journal of International Relations, 19(3), 427–57.Google Scholar
Maliniak, D., Oakes, A., Peterson, S. & Tierney, M. J. (2011). International Relations in the US Academy, International Studies Quarterly, 55(2), 437–64.Google Scholar
Maliniak, D., Peterson, S., Powers, R. & Tierney, M. J. (2014). TRIP 2014 Faculty Survey, Williamsburg: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations. https://trip.wm.edu/charts/Google Scholar
Maliniak, D., Peterson, S. & Tierney, M. J. (2012). TRIP Around the World: Teaching, Research, and Policy Views of International Relations Faculty in 20 Countries, Williamsburg: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations.Google Scholar
Ross, D. (1993). The Origins of American Social Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steinmetz, G. (2020). Historicism and Positivism in Sociology: From Weimar Germany to the Contemporary United States, in Herman, P. & van Veldhuizen, A. (eds.). Historicism: A Travelling Concept, London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Zarakol, A. (2011a). After Defeat: How the East Learned to Live with the West, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zarakol, A. (2011b). What Makes Terrorism Modern? Terrorism, Legitimacy, and the International System, Review of International Studies, 37(5), 2311–36.Google Scholar
Zarakol, A. (2017a). States and Ontological Security: A Historical Rethinking, Cooperation & Conflict, 52(1), 48–68.Google Scholar
Zarakol, A. (2017b). Hierarchies in World Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zarakol, A. (2018). Sovereign Equality as Misrecognition, Review of International Studies, 44(5), 848–62.Google Scholar
Zarakol, A. (2022). Before the West: The Rise and Fall of Eastern World Orders, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar