Sovereignties: Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian

Takashi Inoguchi, Paul Martyn Bacon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Sovereignty remains the key concept and principle according to which the world is ordered. But sovereignty is also a disputed concept and a contested social practice; it has come under fierce assault from a number of diverse sources. Sovereignty is paradoxical in nature and hypocritically practised. States have different empirical degrees and qualitative types of sovereignty, ranging from the merely formal to the substantial to the popular. States also have different dispositions towards sovereignty, and are liable to project their own in different ways in pursuit of conflicting objectives. Different groups of states attempt to impose their understandings and beliefs on the international system. There are three ideal types which help us to understand the issue of sovereignty and the interactions of sovereign states. These are respectively Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian. The Westphalian paradigm has the maintenance and protection of state sovereignty as its key concept. The liberal paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of popular sovereignty and controversies over the extent to which this ideal should be promoted and exported. The anti-utopian paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of quasi-sovereignty or the loss of sovereignty, and in terms of resistance to attempts to impose globalization and liberal values on recalcitrant states and cultures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)285-304
Number of pages20
JournalInternational Relations of the Asia-Pacific
Volume1
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2001 Aug 1
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

sovereignty
paradigm
Sovereignty
ideal type
international system
assault
disposition
globalization
interaction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)
  • Political Science and International Relations

Cite this

Sovereignties : Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian. / Inoguchi, Takashi; Bacon, Paul Martyn.

In: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, Vol. 1, No. 2, 01.08.2001, p. 285-304.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ef132e9404d24973ab22efc9fc7dd986,
title = "Sovereignties: Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian",
abstract = "Sovereignty remains the key concept and principle according to which the world is ordered. But sovereignty is also a disputed concept and a contested social practice; it has come under fierce assault from a number of diverse sources. Sovereignty is paradoxical in nature and hypocritically practised. States have different empirical degrees and qualitative types of sovereignty, ranging from the merely formal to the substantial to the popular. States also have different dispositions towards sovereignty, and are liable to project their own in different ways in pursuit of conflicting objectives. Different groups of states attempt to impose their understandings and beliefs on the international system. There are three ideal types which help us to understand the issue of sovereignty and the interactions of sovereign states. These are respectively Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian. The Westphalian paradigm has the maintenance and protection of state sovereignty as its key concept. The liberal paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of popular sovereignty and controversies over the extent to which this ideal should be promoted and exported. The anti-utopian paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of quasi-sovereignty or the loss of sovereignty, and in terms of resistance to attempts to impose globalization and liberal values on recalcitrant states and cultures.",
author = "Takashi Inoguchi and Bacon, {Paul Martyn}",
year = "2001",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/irap/1.2.285",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "285--304",
journal = "International Relations of the Asia-Pacific",
issn = "1470-482X",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sovereignties

T2 - Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian

AU - Inoguchi, Takashi

AU - Bacon, Paul Martyn

PY - 2001/8/1

Y1 - 2001/8/1

N2 - Sovereignty remains the key concept and principle according to which the world is ordered. But sovereignty is also a disputed concept and a contested social practice; it has come under fierce assault from a number of diverse sources. Sovereignty is paradoxical in nature and hypocritically practised. States have different empirical degrees and qualitative types of sovereignty, ranging from the merely formal to the substantial to the popular. States also have different dispositions towards sovereignty, and are liable to project their own in different ways in pursuit of conflicting objectives. Different groups of states attempt to impose their understandings and beliefs on the international system. There are three ideal types which help us to understand the issue of sovereignty and the interactions of sovereign states. These are respectively Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian. The Westphalian paradigm has the maintenance and protection of state sovereignty as its key concept. The liberal paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of popular sovereignty and controversies over the extent to which this ideal should be promoted and exported. The anti-utopian paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of quasi-sovereignty or the loss of sovereignty, and in terms of resistance to attempts to impose globalization and liberal values on recalcitrant states and cultures.

AB - Sovereignty remains the key concept and principle according to which the world is ordered. But sovereignty is also a disputed concept and a contested social practice; it has come under fierce assault from a number of diverse sources. Sovereignty is paradoxical in nature and hypocritically practised. States have different empirical degrees and qualitative types of sovereignty, ranging from the merely formal to the substantial to the popular. States also have different dispositions towards sovereignty, and are liable to project their own in different ways in pursuit of conflicting objectives. Different groups of states attempt to impose their understandings and beliefs on the international system. There are three ideal types which help us to understand the issue of sovereignty and the interactions of sovereign states. These are respectively Westphalian, liberal and anti-utopian. The Westphalian paradigm has the maintenance and protection of state sovereignty as its key concept. The liberal paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of popular sovereignty and controversies over the extent to which this ideal should be promoted and exported. The anti-utopian paradigm is conceived in terms of the concept of quasi-sovereignty or the loss of sovereignty, and in terms of resistance to attempts to impose globalization and liberal values on recalcitrant states and cultures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937342016&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937342016&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/irap/1.2.285

DO - 10.1093/irap/1.2.285

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84937342016

VL - 1

SP - 285

EP - 304

JO - International Relations of the Asia-Pacific

JF - International Relations of the Asia-Pacific

SN - 1470-482X

IS - 2

ER -