The Fallible Nation as Image of the State: An Analysis of Max Weber's ＂Social Action Approach＂ and its Implications for IR

10.6185/TJIA.V.201807_22(1).0003

Richard Ian Wright

Weber ； methodological ； individualism ； interpretivist ； fallible ； rational

Tamkang Journal of International Affairs

22卷1期（2018 / 07 / 01）

69 - 168

英文

One of the great strengths of the ＂unitary-purposive actor＂ model is that it facilitates the analytical isolation of systemic constraints on state behavior. However, drawbacks of the model include its exclusion of domestic politics, which leads to an inability to conceptualize state agency, and ultimately the inability of ＂neo-utilitarian＂ theories to explain systemic transformations. One solution to these drawbacks is to develop an image of the state as a pluralistic aggregate of individuals. Towards this endeavor, I employ Max Weber's ＂methodological individualism,＂ along with his corresponding interpretivist ＂social action approach.＂ However, to be amenable to the concerns of IR, Weber's approach needs to be modified to include certain external constraints on state behavior. This modification leads me to consider six motivations behind social action: Desires, Unexamined actions, Beliefs, Limitations, Interests, and Coercion (DUBLIC). For analysis of international behavior, these individual motivations need to be theoretically connected to the state. To accomplish this, guided by Weber's classification of ＂class, status, and party,＂ I outline what I see as the essential ＂components＂ of the nation-namely; an economic, socio-cultural, and political elite; as well as an ＂enfranchised＂ and a ＂disenfranchised＂ populace. Here, I also rely upon Weber's concept of the ＂ideal-type＂ to flesh-out several contemporary ＂multi-scaler institutions＂ which appear to have causal influence upon international behavior. These institutions include economic institutions-free market vs. protectionist; sociocultural institutions-cosmopolitan vs. communitarian; and two sets of political institutions-democratic vs. authoritarian, and solidarist vs. pluralist. Finally, I use the revised ＂social action approach＂ to analyze the ＂national components＂ and some of the ways they potentially interact with the designated ＂multi-scaler institutions.＂ Overall, the image of the state developed here is that of an individually-mediated ＂fallible nation,＂ rather than a unitary ＂rational actor.＂ It is my hope that this image can contribute necessary complexity to an IR understanding of the state as the fundamental international actor, without sacrificing too much parsimony.

1. Anderson, Benedict(1983).Imagined Communities: Reflection on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism.London:Verso.
2. Beardsworth, Richard(2011).Cosmopolitanism and International Relations Theory.Cambridge:Polity Press.
3. Bull, Hedley(1977).The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics.London:Macmillan.
4. Buzan, Barry(2014).An Introduction to the English School of International Relations: The Societal Approach.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
5. Buzan, Barry(2004).From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
6. Buzan, Barry,Jones, Charles,Little, Richard(1993).The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism.New York:Columbia University Press.
7. Buzan, Barry,Little, Richard(2000).International Systems in World History: Remaking the Study of International Relations.Oxford University Press.
8. Buzan, Barry,Weaver, Ole,de Wilde, Jaap(1998).A New Framework for Analysis.Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc..
9. Campbell, David(1998).Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
10. Chomsky, Noam(2016).Who Rules the World?.New York:Metropolitan Books.
11. Cox, Robert(1981).Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory.Millennium,10(4),126-155.
12. Cox, Robert(1996).Approaches to World Order.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
13. Cox, Robert W.(1987).Production, Power and Order: Social Forces in the Making of History.New York:Columbia University Press.
14. de Saussure, Ferdinand(1966).Course in General Linguistics.New York:McGraw-Hill Book Company.
15. Deutsch, Karl(1968).The Analysis of International Relations.New Jersey:Prentice Hall Inc..
16. Deutsche, Karl(1957).Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
17. Dowse, Robert E.,Hughes, John A.(1972).Political Sociology.Chichester:John Wiley & Sons.
18. Doyle, Michael W.(1986).Liberalism and World Politics.The American Political Science Review,80(4),1151-1169.
19. Durkheim, Emile(1984).The Division of Labor in Society.USA:The Free Press.
20. Durkheim, Emile,Lukes, Steven(ed.)(1982).Durkheim: The Rules of Sociological Method and Selected Texts on Sociology and its Method.New York:The Free Press.
21. Foucault, Michel(1980).Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and other Writings 1972-1977.New York:Pantheon Books.
22. Friedman, Gil,Starr, Harvey(1997).Agency, Structure, and International Politics: From ontology to empirical inquiry.London:Routledge.
23. Friedman, Thomas(1999).The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization.New York:FSG.
24. Fukuyama, Francis(2006).The End of History and the Last Man.New York:Free Press.
25. Giddens, Anthony(1976).New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Sociological Method.New York:Basic Books.
26. Goldstein, Judith(ed.),Keohane, Robert(ed.)(1993).Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change.New York:Cornell University.
27. Goldstein, Judith,Keohane, Robert(1993).Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change.New York:Cornell University Press.
28. Gourevitch, Peter(1978).The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics.International Organization,32(4),881-912.
29. Gramsci, Antonio(1971).Selections from the Prison Notebooks.New York:International Publishers.
30. Grieco, Joseph(1990).Cooperation among Nations.Ithaca:Cornell University Press.
31. Grieco, Joseph(1988).Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation.International Organization,42
32. Habermas, Jurgen,Seidman, Steven(ed.)(1989).Jurgen Habermas on Society and Politics: A Reader.Boston:Beacon Press.
33. Hill, Christopher(2003).The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
34. Hobden, Steven,Hobson, John M.(2002).Historical Sociology of International Relations.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
35. Hobson, John M.(2000).The State and International Relations.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
36. Hobson, John M.(2002).'Bringing the State Back In, Kicking the State Back Out' Reconstructing the Identity of the Discipline of International Relations.Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of Nordic International Studies Association,37(4),437-444.
37. Hollis, Martin,Smith, Steven(1990).Explaining and Understanding International Relations.New York:Oxford University Press.
38. Huntington, Samuel P.(1996).The Clash of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order.S New York:Simon and Schuster.
39. Joseph, Jonathan(ed.),Wight, Colin(ed.)(2010).Scientific Realism and International Relations.Palgrave Macmillan.
40. Kegley, Charles W.,Blanton, Shannon L.(2009).World Politics: Trend and Transformation.Boston:Cengage Learning Inc..
41. Keohane, Robert O.(ed.)(1986).Neorealism and its Critics.New York:Columbia University Press.
42. Keohane, Robert(ed.)(1986).Neorealism and its Critics.New York:Columbia University Press.
43. Keohane, Robert,Nye, Joseph(1989).Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition.Boston:Little Brown and Company.
44. Koivisto, Marjo(2012).Normative State Power in International Relations.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
45. Krasner, S. D.(1978).Defending the National Interest: Raw Materials Investments and U.S. Foreign Policy.New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
46. Krasner, Stephen D.(ed.)(1983).International Regimes.New York:Cornell University Press.
47. Kratochwil, Friedrich(1982).On the Notion of 'Interest' in International Relations.International Organization,36(1),1-30.
48. Kratochwil, Friedrich(ed.),Mansfield, Edward D.(ed.)(2006).International Organizations and Global Governance: A Reader.London:Pearson and Longman.
49. Little, Richard(ed.),Williams, John(ed.)(2006).The Anarchical Society in a Globalized World.London:Palgrave Macmillan.
50. Little, Richard(ed.),Williams, John(ed.)(2006).The Anarchic Society in a Globalized World.London:Palgrave Macmillan.
51. Little, Richard,Williams, John(2006).The Anarchic Society in a Globalized World.London:Palgrave Macmillan.
52. Mann, Michael(1993).The Sources of Social Power.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
53. Mayall, James(1990).Nationalism and International Society.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
54. Mearsheimer, John J.(2001).The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.New York:W. W. Norton and Company.
55. Milner, Helen V.(1997).Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations.New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
56. Morgenthau, Hans(1995).Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace.London:McGraw-Hill.
57. Neufeld, Mark(1995).The Restructuring of International Relations Theory.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
58. Nye, Joseph S., Jr.(2005).Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History.New York:Pearson Longman.
59. Nye, Joseph S., Jr.(1993).Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History.:Harper Collins.
60. Piketty, Thomas(2014).Capitalism in the Twenty-First Century.The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
61. Rose, Gideon(1998).Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy.World Politics,51,144-172.
62. Roth, Guenther(1976).History and Sociology in the Work of Max Weber.British Journal of Sociology,27(3)
63. Ruggie, John Gerard(1998).What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge.International Organization,52(4)
64. Smith, Steve(1997).Epistemology, Postmodernism and International Relations Theory: A Reply to Østerud.Journal of Peace Research,34(3),330-336.
65. Smith, Steve(ed.),Booth, Ken(ed.),Zalewski, Marysia(ed.)(1996).International Theory: Positivism and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
66. Stiglitz, Joseph(2010).Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy.London:W. W. Norton and Company.
67. Wallerstein, Immanuel(2006).European Universalism: The Rhetoric of Power.New York:The New Press.
68. Wallerstein, Immanuel(2004).World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction.Durham:Duke University Press.
69. Waltz, Kenneth N.(1979).Theory of International Politics.New York:McGraw-Hill.
70. Weber, Max,Gerth, H.H.(ed.),Mills, C. Wright(ed.)(1964).From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology.New York:Galaxy Books.
71. Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, edited by Talcott Parsons. New York: Oxford University Press, 1947.
72. Weber, Max,Roth, Guenther(ed.),Wittich, Claus(ed.)(1978).Economy and Society: An outline of interpretive sociology.Berkley:University of California Press.
73. Weber, Max. On the Methods of the Social Sciences, edited by Edward A. Shils and Henry A. Finch. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1949.
74. Wendt, Alexander(1987).The Agent Structure Problem in International Relations Theory.International Organization,41(3),355-370.
75. Wendt, Alexander(2004).The State as Person in International Theory.Review of International Studies,30(2)
76. Wendt, Alexander(1999).A Social Theory of International Politics.Cambridge University Press.
77. Wight, Martin,Bull, Headley(ed.),Hobraad, Carstaan(ed.)(1995).Power Politics.Leicester:Leicester University Press.
78. Wittkopf, Eugene R.,McCormack, James M..The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence.Maryland:Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.