Friday, 17 January 2014

Hegemonic stability theory

Hegemonic stability theory (HST) is a theory of international relations. Based on study from the fields of political science, economics, and history, HST specifies that the international system is more likely to remain steady when a single nation-state is the leading world power, or hegemon. 

Thus, the fall of an accessible hegemon or the state of no hegemon lessens the constancy of international system. When a hegemon implements leadership, either through diplomacy, coercion, or persuasion, it is in fact deploying its "preponderance of power." This is called hegemony, which refers to a state's skill to "single-handedly dominate the rules and arrangements ...[of] international political and financial associations.

Tuesday, 26 February 2013

Hegemonic stability theory

Hegemonic stability theory (HST) is a theory of international relations. Rooted in research from the fields of political science, economics, and history, HST indicates that the international system is more likely to remain stable when a single nation-state is the dominant world power, or hegemon. Thus, the fall of an existing hegemon or the state of no hegemon diminishes the stability of international system. When a hegemon exercises leadership, either through diplomacy, coercion, or persuasion, it is actually deploying its "preponderance of power." This is called hegemony, which refers to a state's ability to "single-handedly dominate the rules and arrangements ... [of] international political and economic relations."

Research on hegemony can be divided into two schools of thought: the realist school and the systemic school. Each school can be further sub-divided. Two dominant theories have emerged from each school. What Robert Keohane first called the "theory of hegemonic stability," joins A. F. K. Organski's Power Transition Theory as the two dominant approaches to the realist school of thought. Long Cycle Theory, espoused by George Modelski, and World Systems Theory, espoused by Immanuel Wallerstein, has emerged as the two dominant approaches to the systemic school of thought.

Charles P. Kindleberger is one of the scholars most closely associated with HST, and is even regarded by some as the father of HST. Kindleberger argued, in his 1973 book The World in Depression: 1929-1939, that the economic chaos between World War I and World War II that led to the Great Depression, can be blamed in part on the lack of a world leader with a dominant economy. The theory is about more than economics though: the central idea behind HST is that the stability of the global system, in terms of politics, international law, and so on, relies on the hegemon to develop and enforce the rules of the system. In addition to Kindleberger, key figures in the development of hegemonic stability theory include Modelski, Robert Gilpin, Robert Keohane, Stephen Krasner, and others.

Wednesday, 25 July 2012

Hegemony

Hegemony (UK /hɨˈɡɛməni/, US /ˈhɛdʒɨmoʊni/, US /hɨˈdʒɛməni/; Greek: ἡγεμονία hēgemonía, “leadership”, “rule”) is an indirect form of imperial dominance in which the hegemon (leader state) rules geopolitically sub-ordinate states by the implied means of power, the threat of the threat, rather than by direct military force. In Ancient Greece (8th c. BC – AD 6th c.), hegemony denoted the politico–military dominance of a city-state over other city-states. In the 19th century, hegemony denoted the geopolitical and the cultural predominance of one country upon others; from which derived hegemonism, the Great Power politics meant to establish European hegemony upon continental Asia and Africa. In the 20th-century, Antonio Gramsci developed the philosophy and the sociology of geopolitical hegemony into the theory of cultural hegemony, whereby one social class can manipulate the system of values and mores of a society, in order to create and establish a ruling-class Weltanschauung, a worldview that justifies the status quo of bourgeois domination of the other social classes of the society.

In the praxis of hegemony, imperial dominance is established by means of cultural imperialism, whereby the leader state (hegemon) dictates the internal politics and the societal character of the sub-ordinate states that constitute the hegemonic sphere of influence; either by an internal, sponsored government or by an external, installed government.

The imposition of the hegemon’s way of life — an imperial lingua franca language and bureaucracies (social, economic, educational, governing) — transforms the concrete imperialism of direct military domination into the abstract power of the status quo, indirect imperial domination.Under hegemony, rebellion (social, political, economic, armed) is eliminated either by co-optation of the rebels or by suppression (police and military), without direct intervention by the hegemon; the examples are the latter-stage Spanish and British empires, and the 19th- and 20th-century reichs of unified Germany (1871–1945).

Wednesday, 18 February 2004

Dean, Kerry, et al

Dean, Kerry, et al

On a less happy note than the Bondra deal, of course Howard Dean called it quits today. I'm disappointed, of course, because I've been supporting Dean. But it's really been coming ever since New Hampshire, so today's announcement was no surprise. I suppose the most disappointing part is yet again I don't get the pay-off of actualy getting to vote for my preferred candidate in the primary and have it be meaningful. It's yet again all over before Ohio's primary. I guess if I ever want my vote to count, I'm just going to have to move to New Hampshire.

One of the reasons I was supporting Dean in the first place, and one of the things I still think he did right, after all was said and done, is that he managed to convince a lot of people who had never been active before, or who had grown disgruntled with the Democratic party and the electoral process, to get involved. I just hope now those people stay involved. On some of the Dean listservs I belong to, a lot of people are saying they won't vote for the Democratic nominee, especially if it's John Kerry. I hope they reconsider that before November, because while I'm not the biggest Kerry fan in the world, he's a hell of a long sight better than Bush. I voted for Nader in 2000 because I didn't see a lot of difference between Gore and Bush. I wouldn't go so far as to say I deeply regret that vote now, but I will say that, having lived through the past three years, there's no way I'd vote for a third-party candidate this time around. There's too much at stake.

As far as the Ohio primary itself, I'm leaning towards Edwards. Of all the candidates who have cycled through this process so far, he's the one who has gone up the most in my estimation after watching him in debates. And even if he can't win the nomination, I think he'd be a good vice-presidential choice.

I actually went to see Kerry tonight, as he was here in Columbus today kicking off the Ohio campaign. I have to say, it was a better speech than I expected. Of course, it was in a labor hall before a largely union crowd, so it was a speech geared towards the sorts of issues I value the most -- health care, jobs, inequality, etc. I can vote for this guy in November. He may not be my first choice, or even my second or third, but I can vote for him.

For what it's worth, John Edwards is supposed to be in Columbus this weekend. So, if nothing else, I can go see him and see how he compares in person to Kerry. And I will have seen three of the candidates "in the flesh" this year...sadly, none of them were the guy I was actually supporting (the third one was Al Sharpton).

The stars are aligning!

It's finally happened -- the Sens traded for Peter Bondra today. So my favorite NHL player is now playing for one of my two favorite NHL teams. I'm not sure if it's going to be the final piece of the puzzle that means Ottawa will win it all, but of course I'm still thrilled about it. I'll finally get to cheer for Bondra whole-heartedly. And hopefully he'll get to cap off (no pun intended) his career with a Stanley Cup. That would just be perfect.

Of course, it's a little sad at the same time. Bondra was one of the few NHLers left who had played his entire 10-year-plus career with one team, and part of me would have liked to see him retire as a Cap. But if he had to be traded, I'm glad it was to Ottawa.

Tuesday, 17 February 2004

Jenny don't lose my feedback rating...

Jenny don't lose my feedback rating...

Bidding was up to $44,000 last time I checked, but now the 867-5309 auction is listed as "invalid." Guess eBay pulled the plug on it, and it will go down there with soiled panties, your soul, and Space Shuttle debris as items that are now verboten on eBay.