Review: The Restructuring of International Relations Theory
| DOI | 10.1177/002070209705200115 |
| Date | 01 March 1997 |
| Author | Craig T. Cobane |
| Published date | 01 March 1997 |
| Subject Matter | Review |
172
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
In
terms
of
coherence,
a
seamless
edited
collection
is
too
much
to
expect.
But
there
is
considerable tension
between
the
concepts
in
the
introduction and
a
number
of
chapters.
The
only
point
on
which
the
contributors
appear
genuinely
to
agree
is
that
domestic
and
global
fac-
tors
interact.
While
the
introduction
calls
for
a
new
approach,
a
number
of
contributions
appear
simply
to
transmit
the
structural
determinist
strain
of
Marxism
(paleostructuralism)
out
of
the
domestic
context
and
into
the
international
system.
For
those
interested
in
critical
theory
(which
ought to
be everyone),
this
volume
contains
some
genuinely
interesting
contributions
which
are
successful
on the
terms laid
out
in
the
introduction,
and
one
might
in
particular
highlight
the chapters
by
Wilde
on
Sweden,
Gills
on
Korea,
and
Halperin
on
nationalism.
Halperin's
thesis,
as
an
example,
is
inter-
esting,
controversial,
and
succeeds in
going
beyond
the
determinism
which
afflicts
much
of
the
volume.
Perhaps
the
most sophisticated
chap-
ter
in
this
regard
is
by
Cerny,
who clearly
recognizes
the
ways
in
which
political
decisions,
changing
institutional
forms,
and
the
structure
of
markets
(in
his case,
financial
markets)
interact
in
a
complex
process
to
underpin
the
mechanisms
of
global
change and
their
more
local
mani-
festations.
The
volume
transcends the
state-global
divide
well
enough,
but
the most
persistent problem
is
the
structural
determinism
and
'economism'
which
has
plagued
much
of
the
radical
tradition.
Why
there
was
not
a
more
systematic
and
consistent
attempt
to
develop the
work
of Robert
Cox,
which
'is
successful
in
this
regard,
remains
for
the
editors
to
explain.
Geoffrey
R.D.
Underhill/University
of
Warwick
THE
RESTRUCTURING OF
INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS
THEORY
Mark
A.
Neufeld
Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
1995,
xi,
174,
US$16.95
paper
Mark
Neufeld
sets
out
to
provide
an
answer to
the
question:
why
is
the-
ory
focussed
toward
human
emancipation
so
poorly
developed
within
the discipline
of international
relations
(IR)?
He
blames
the
dominance
of
'positivism,'
as
the
logic
of
investigation,
in
the
study
of
international
To continue reading
Request your trial