Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:38:32.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

World Order Reform and Utopian Thought: A Contemporary Watershed?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Ian Clark
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

During the 1950's and 1960's, Utopian thought, like ideology generally, was deemed to be at an end. Typically, Judith Shklar pronounced that “the urge to construct grand designs for the political future of mankind is gone,” basing her judgment on the ground that “the last vestiges of Utopian faith required for such an enterprise have vanished.” Even more recently, and correspondingly less perspicaciously, Paul Seabury expressed the view that “a Utopian concern for ‘world order’ as a planned qualitative transformation designed to meet new needs seems to have been washed out. … Prescriptive futurism now seems passé. In the event, such obituaries have turned out to be premature: thought about world order reform has experienced a resurgence during the 1970's, to such an extent that we might be tempted to equate the intellectual mood of the present time with the Utopian impulse of the post-1918 decade.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , January 1979 , pp. 96 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1979

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 Shklar, Judith, After Utopia: The Decline of Political Faith (Princeton, 1957), p. VIICrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Seaburg, Paul “Practical International Futures” in Political Science and the Study of the Future, ed. Somit, A. (Hinsdale, III., 1974), pp. 286–87Google Scholar.

3 Some of the burgeoning literature will be cited in the course of this article. Details of the specific output of the World Order Models Project can be found in the recent review articles by Lasswell, Harold D., “The Promise of the World Order Modelling Movement,” World Politics, 29 (04, 1977), 425–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and (from a critical perspective) by Farer, Tom, “The Greening of the Globe; A Preliminary Appraisal of the World Order Models Project (WOMP),” International Organization (Winter 1977), pp. 129–147Google Scholar.

4 Hinsley, F.H., Power and the Pursuit of Peace (Cambridge, 1963), p. 3Google Scholar.

5 This classification is used by Beres, L.R. and Targ, H.R., eds., Planning Alternative World Futures (New York, 1975), pp. xiv–xvGoogle Scholar.

6 Cox, R.W., “On Thinking about Future World Order,” World Politics, 28 (01, 1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cox specifies three paradigmatic approaches to future world order: the natural-rational; the positivist-evolutionary; the historicist dialectical.

7 Ibid., pp. 177–78.

8 Camilleri, J.: Civilization in Crisis: Human Prospects in a Changing World (Cambridge, 1976), p. 183Google Scholar.

9 Bull, Hedley, “The Theory of International Politics 1919–69,” in The Aberystwyth Papers, ed. Porter, B. (Oxford, 1972), p. 34Google Scholar.

10 Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia (London, 1960), p. 179Google Scholar.

11 This point is discussed in Carr, E.H., The Twenty Years' Crisis (London, 1939), pts. 1 and 2Google Scholar.

12 Evans, G., “Some Problems with a History of Thought in International Relations,” International Relations, 6 (11, 1974), 720Google Scholar.

13 Bentham, J., Plan for a Universal and Perpetual Peace (London, 1927), p. 43Google Scholar.

14 The Way of Peace (Port Washington, N.Y., 1968; original 1928), p. 138Google Scholar.

15 See Carr, Twenty Years' Crisis, chap. 4.

16 Zimmern, A.E., “The Future of Civilization,” in Towards an Enduring Peace, ed. Bourne, R. (N.Y.: American Assoc. for International Conciliation, 1916), p. 226Google Scholar.

17 Beres, & Targ, , World Futures, p. xviiGoogle Scholar.

18 See S. Mendlovitz's general introduction to the series of WOMP studies.

19 Falk, Richard, This Endangered Planet (New York, 1971), p. 9Google Scholar.

20 Camilleri, , Civilization in Crisis, p. 180Google Scholar.

21 The distinction between these two terms is discussed in Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (London, 1977), pp. 8–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Rosen, S. and Jones, W., The Logic of International Relations, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1977), p. 415Google Scholar.

23 Armstrong, J.D., “Beyond the State System: Recent Conceptions of Future World Society” (Unpublished paper, Dept. of International Relations, Australian National University, 08, 1975), p. 1Google Scholar.

24 Cox, , “On Thinking about Future World Order,” pp. 178–80Google Scholar.

25 von Weizacker, C.F., “A Sceptical Contribution” in On the Creation of a Just World Order: Preferred Worlds for the 1990's, ed. Mendlovitz, S. H. (New York, 1975), p. 114Google Scholar.

26 Farer, , “Greening of the Globe,” p. 132Google Scholar.

27 See Hinsley, Pursuit of Peace, chaps. 1 and 2.

28 Farer, , “Greening of the Globe,” p, 132Google Scholar.

29 See e.g., Hinsley, Pursuit of Peace, chap. 4, Waltz, K., “Kant, Liberalism and War,” American Political Science Review, 56 (06, 1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 The quotations are taken from the selections of Kant's writings reproduced in Forsyth, M.E. et al. , eds., The Theory of International Relations (London, 1970), p. 211Google Scholar.

31 Ibid., p. 220.

32 Ibid., p. 183.

33 Ibid., p. 213.

34 Ibid.

35 Ibid., p. 198.

36 Ibid., p. 194.

37 Ibid., pp. 194–95.

38 Ibid., p. 185.

39 Ibid., pp. 183–85.

40 Cited in Rosen, and Jones, , Logic of International Relations, p. 429Google Scholar.

41 Beres, L.R., “Behavioural Paths to a New World Order” in , Beres and , Targ, World Futures, p. 273Google Scholar.

42 Falk, R. draws attention to ihe same three reformist reactions in Endangered Planet, pp. 283–84Google Scholar.

43 Quoted in Thompson, K.: Political Realism and the Crisis of World Politics (Princeton, 1960), p. 28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Carr, , Twenty Years' Crisis, p. 8Google Scholar.

45 Harris, E., Annihilation and Utopia (London, 1966)Google Scholar.

46 Hutchins, R. M., “The Constitutional Foundations for World Order,” in Principles and Problems of International Politics, eds. Morgenthau, H. and Thompson, K. (New York, 1950), p. 143Google Scholar. Emphasis added.

47 Falk, Richard, “Reforming World Order: Zones of Consciousness and Domains of Action” in , Beres & , Targ, World Futures, p. 198Google Scholar.

48 Jaspers, Karl, The Future of Mankind (Chicago, 1958)Google Scholar.

49 Ibid., p. 14.

50 Ibid., p. 327.

51 Niebuhr, Reinhold, “The Myth of World Government,” The Nation, 16 03 1946Google Scholar (reprinted in Morgenthau and Thompson, p. 137).

52 For an example of a less than optimistic appraisal, see Miller, A.J., “Doomsday Politics: Prospects for International Cooperation,” International Journal, 28 (1972), 122–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 Wagar, W., Building the City of Man (San Francisco, 1971), p. 29Google Scholar.

54 Camilleri, , Civilization in Crisis, p. 185Google Scholar.

55 Preface in Wagar, W., ed., History and the Idea of Mankind (Albuquerque, N.M., 1971), p. viiGoogle Scholar.

56 Falk, , Endangered Planet, p. 101Google Scholar.

57 Falk, , “Reforming World Order,” p. 198Google Scholar.

58 Rapoport, Anatole, Strategy and Conscience (New York, 1964), pp. 25–30Google Scholar.

59 Ibid., p. 25.

60 Ibid., p. 30.

61 Ibid.

62 See Mendlovitz's general introduction to the WOMP series.

63 Quoted in Marriott, J.A.R., Commonwealth or Anarchy? A Survey of Projects of Peace (New York, 1939), p. 76Google Scholar.

64 Hinsley, , Pursuit of Peace, p. 1Google Scholar.

65 Forsyth, , Theory of International Relations, p. 183Google Scholar.

66 Bull, , Anarchical Society, p. 262Google Scholar.

67 Shields, L.P. & Ott, M.C., “The Environmental Crisis: International and Supranational Approaches,” International Relations, 6 (11, 1974), 645–46Google Scholar.

68 Ibid., p. 647.

69 Kennan, George, “To Prevent a World Wasteland: A Proposal,” Foreign Affairs, 48 (04, 1970), 413CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 Rapoport, Anatole, Conflict in Man-Made Environment (Harmondsworth, 1974), p. 162Google Scholar.

71 Mannheim, , Ideology and Utopia, pp. 190–205Google Scholar.

72 Ibid., p. 201.

73 Jaspers, , Future of Mankind, p. 324Google Scholar.