IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/235853.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Normative Order of International Politics: Critique and Legitimacy

Author

Listed:
  • Thiel, Thorsten

Abstract

The article discusses the politicisation of international politics and its effects on the legitimacy of international institutions. It is argued that a more complex understanding of the interplay of institutional and non-institutional practices of resistance is needed and that one has to draw from theories of international relations as well as from approaches from democratic heory to better understand the developments and its effects on the legitimacy of international institutions. The article proceeds by, first, reconstructing how research in IR has responded to the emergence of civil society critique, focusing in particular on the debate about inclusion through liberal governance mechanisms and the discussion of the regulatory power of counter-hegemonic actors in critical theories; it then turns to democratic theoretical approaches, in which the concept of “opposition” becomes a cipher for legitimate critique, yet the value of opposition and its form is determined very differently in different lines of thought. Finally, it is shown that the debate on the politicisation of international relations would particularly benefit from a republican understanding of politics, since the analytical focus and normative impetus lies in the relation between the visibly controversial nature of order and the creation of sites for opinion formation in civil society.

Suggested Citation

  • Thiel, Thorsten, 2020. "The Normative Order of International Politics: Critique and Legitimacy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 25-45.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:235853
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/235853/1/Full-text-chapter-Thiel-The-normative-order.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCormick, John P., 2001. "Machiavellian Democracy: Controlling Elites with Ferocious Populism," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(2), pages 297-313, June.
    2. James Tully, 2006. "A New Kind of Europe? Democratic Integration in the European Union," The Constitutionalism Web-Papers p0021, University of Hamburg, Faculty for Economics and Social Sciences, Department of Social Sciences, Institute of Political Science.
    3. Andrew Schaap, 2007. "Political Theory and the Agony of Politics," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 5(1), pages 56-74, January.
    4. Stephen Elstub, 2010. "The Third Generation of Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 8(3), pages 291-307, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gradstein, Mark, 2024. "Social Status Inequality and Populism," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 434-444.
    2. Veikko Eranti & Taina Meriluoto, 2023. "PLURALITY IN URBAN POLITICS: Conflict and Commonality in Mouffe and Thévenot," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(5), pages 693-709, September.
    3. Abby Lindsay, 2018. "Social learning as an adaptive measure to prepare for climate change impacts on water provision in Peru," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(4), pages 477-487, December.
    4. Gil, Olga, 2019. "Public participation in China and the West," SocArXiv dapvj, Center for Open Science.
    5. Antje Wiener, 2006. "Constructivist Approaches in International Relations Theory: Puzzles and Promises," The Constitutionalism Web-Papers p0025, University of Hamburg, Faculty for Economics and Social Sciences, Department of Social Sciences, Institute of Political Science.
    6. Bart van Leeuwen, 2015. "Absorbing the agony of agonism? The limits of cultural questioning and alternative variations of intercultural civility," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(4), pages 793-808, March.
    7. Harri Raisio & Pirkko Vartiainen, 2015. "Accelerating the public’s learning curve on wicked policy issues: results from deliberative forums on euthanasia," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 339-361, September.
    8. Mejia, Daniel & Posada, Carlos-Esteban, 2007. "Populist policies in the transition to democracy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 932-953, December.
    9. Monika Berg & Rolf Lidskog, 2018. "Pathways to deliberative capacity: the role of the IPCC," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 11-24, May.
    10. Brown, Judy & Dillard, Jesse, 2013. "Critical accounting and communicative action: On the limits of consensual deliberation," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 176-190.
    11. Andrew F Smith, 2014. "Political deliberation and the challenge of bounded rationality," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 13(3), pages 269-291, August.
    12. Tella, Rafael Di & Rotemberg, Julio J., 2018. "Populism and the return of the “Paranoid Style”: Some evidence and a simple model of demand for incompetence as insurance against elite betrayal," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 988-1005.
    13. Matheus Alves Zanella & Ariane Goetz & Stephan Rist & Oscar Schmidt & Jes Weigelt, 2018. "Deliberation in Multi-Stakeholder Participation: A Heuristic Framework Applied to the Committee on World Food Security," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    14. Fleuß, Dannica & Helbig, Karoline, 2021. "Measuring Nation States’ Deliberativeness: Systematic Challenges, Methodological Pitfalls, and Strategies for Upscaling the Measurement of Deliberation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 69(2), pages 307-325.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:235853. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.