Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:39:05.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Wahn, Wahn, Überall Wahn’: A reply to Jahn’s critique of liberal internationalism1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2010

Andrew Moravcsik
Andrew Moravcsik*
Affiliation:
Professor of Politics and International Affairs, Department of Politics, Woodrow Wilson School, Robertson Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
*
* E-mail: amoravcs@princeton.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract 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.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Correspondence: Is Liberal IR Theory Ideological?
Information
International Theory , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 113 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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.)

Footnotes

1

This article is a response to Beate Jahn, ‘Liberal internationalism: from ideology to empirical theory – and back again’, International Theory (2009), 1(3): 409–438. I am grateful to Mareike Kleine for indefatigable research assistance, detailed editing and sound advice on this article, the scope and quality of which went well beyond the norm. ‘Wahn, Wahn, überall Wahn’, the most famous phrase from Richard Wagner’s Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg, opens the Act III monologue by the wise cobbler Hans Sachs. It is difficult to translate. A close rendering would be ‘Folly, folly, everywhere folly’, but with the deeper, slightly archaic resonance of ‘human folly’ and an additional connotation of madness, delusion, and self-deception.

References

Acemoglu, D.Robinson, J.A. (2006), Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B. (2005), Principles of International Politics: People’s Power, Preferences, and Perceptions, 3rd edn., Washington: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Bull, H. (1976), ‘Martin Wight and the theory of international relations’, British Journal of International Studies 2(2): 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, J. (1980), Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ehrlich, S.D. (2007), ‘Access to protection: domestic institutions and trade policy in democracies’, International Organization 61(3): 571–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frieden, J.A. (1999), ‘Actors and preferences in international relations’, in D. Lake and R. Powell (eds), Strategic Choice and International Relations, Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gartzke, E., Li, Q.Boehmer, C. (2001), ‘Investing in the peace: economic interdependence and international conflict’, International Organization 55(2): 391–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gawande, K.Hoekman, B. (2006), ‘Lobbying and agricultural trade policy in the United States’, International Organization 60(3): 527–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowa, J. (2000), Ballots and Bullets: The Elusive Democratic Peace, Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Grossman, G.M.Helpman, E. (1994), ‘Protection for sale’, American Economic Review 84(4): 833–850.Google Scholar
Hellmann, G.Wolf, R. (1993), ‘Neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, and the future of Nato’, Security Studies 3(1): 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hitchcock, W.I. (1999), ‘Review of the choice for Europe: social purpose and state power from Messina to Maastricht by Andrew Moravcsik’, American Historical Review 104(5): 1742–1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, A.G. (1980), ‘Property rights and Empire building: Britain’s annexation of Lagos, 1861’, Journal of Economic History 40(4): 777–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahn, B. (2005), ‘Kant, Mill, and illiberal legacies in international affairs’, International Organization 59(1): 177–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahn, B. (2007), ‘The tragedy of liberal diplomacy: democratization, intervention, statebuilding II’, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 1(2): 211–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahn, B. (2009), ‘Liberal internationalism: from ideology to empirical theory – and back again’, International Theory 1(3): 409–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, I. (2008), Social States: China in International Institutions, 1980–2000, Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keefer, P. (2007), ‘Elections, special interests and financial crisis’, International Organization 61(3): 607–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R.O. (1984), After Hegemony. Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, R.O.Jr.Nye, J.S. (1989), Power and Interdependence. World Politics in Transition, 2nd edn., Boston, USA: Harper Collins Publishers.Google Scholar
Keohane, R.O., Macedo, S.Moravcsik, A. (2009), ‘Democracy-enhancing multilateralism’, International Organization 63(1): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1970), ‘Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes’, in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 91–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, D.Powell, R. (1999), Strategic Choice and International Relations, Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legro, J.W.Moravcsik, A. (1999), ‘Is anybody still a realist?’, International Security 24(2): 5–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, D. (1995), ‘The Harvard School of liberal international theory: a case for closure’, Millennium 24(3): 489–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mannheim, K. (1960), Ideology and Utopia, London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Mansfield, E.D.Snyder, J. (1995), ‘Democratization and the danger of war’, International Security 20(1): 5–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, E.D.Snyder, J. (2005), Electing to Fight: Why Emerging Democracies go to War, Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1992), Liberalism and International Relations Theory (CFIA Working Paper No. 92-6), Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1995), ‘Explaining international human rights regimes: liberal theory and Western Europe’, European Journal of International Relations 1(2): 157–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1997), ‘Taking preferences seriously: a liberal theory of international politics’, International Organization 51(4): 513–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1998), The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Rome to Maastricht, Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (1999), ‘A new statecraft? Supranational entrepreneurs and international cooperation’, International Organization 53(2): 267–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2000a), ‘De Gaulle between Grain and Grandeur: the political economy of French EC Policy, 1958–1970 (Part II)’, Journal of Cold War Studies 2(3): 4–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2000b), ‘De Gaulle between Grain and Grandeur: the political economy of French EC Policy, 1958–1970 (Part I)’, Journal of Cold War Studies 2(2): 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2002), ‘In defence of the “Democratic Deficit”: reassessing legitimacy in the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies 40(4): 603–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2003), ‘Liberal international relations theory: a scientific assessment’, in C. Elman and M. Fendius Elman (eds), Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field, Cambridge: MIT press, pp. 159–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2007a), A rogue reforms. Newsweek, 16 July 2007.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2007b), The self-absorbed Dragon. Newsweek, 29 October 2007.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2008a), Washington cries Wolf. Newsweek, 31 May 2008.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2008b), ‘The new liberalism’, in C. Reus-Smit and D. Snidal (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Relations, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 234–254.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. (2009), ‘Robert Keohane: political theorist’, in Helen V. Milner and A. Moravcsik (eds), Power, Interdependence and Non-state Actors in World Politics, Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press, pp. 257–259.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A.Schimmelfennig, F. (2009), ‘Liberal intergovernmentalism’, in T. Diez and A. Wiener (eds), European Integration Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 67–87.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A.Vachudova, M.A. (2003), ‘National interests, statepower, and EU enlargement’, East European Politics and Societies 17(1): 42–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgenthau, H.J. (1960), Politics Among Nations. The Struggle for Power and Peace, 3rd edn., New York, USA: Alfred A. Knopf Inc.Google Scholar
Powell, R. (1994), ‘Anarchy in international relations theory: The neorealist – neoliberal debate’, International Organization 48(2): 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrik, D. (1992), The rush to free trade in the developing world: why so late? why now? Will it last? NBER Working Paper 3947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruggie, J.G. (1983), ‘International regimes, transactions, and change’, in S. D. Krasner (ed.), International Regimes, Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell University Press, pp. 195–232.Google Scholar
Sebenius, J.K. (1991), ‘Negotiation analysis’, in V. A. Kremenyuk (ed.), International Negotiation: Analysis, Approaches, Issues, San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass. pp. 203–215.Google Scholar
Snyder, J. (1991), Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition, Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, J. (2000), From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict, New York, USA: Norton.Google Scholar
Stasavage, D. (2007), ‘Cities, constitutions, and sovereign borrowing in Europe, 1274–1785’, International Organization 61(3): 489–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomz, M. (2007), Reputation and International Cooperation. Sovereign Debt across Three Centuries, Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vasquez, J.A. (1999), The Power of Power Politics: From Classical Realism to Neotraditionalism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltz, K.N. (1979), Theory of International Politics, Reading, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Wendt, A. (1999), Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar