Conceptualizing good global statehood: progressive foreign policy after the populist moment

被引:2
作者
Gilmore, Jonathan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Oxford Rd, Manchester M13 9PL, Lancs, England
关键词
Cosmopolitanism; English School; good international citizenship; pluralism; populism; progressive foreign policy; solidarism; GOOD INTERNATIONAL CITIZENSHIP; DOMESTIC POLITICS; PUBLIC DIPLOMACY; DE-EUROPEANIZATION; BRITISH FOREIGN; NATIONALISM; SECURITY; ETHICS; RESPONSIBILITY; COMMUNITY;
D O I
10.1017/S1752971922000057
中图分类号
D81 [国际关系];
学科分类号
030207 ;
摘要
This article explores the theoretical challenges for normatively progressive foreign policy following the rise of populist nationalism during the 2010s, using analytical concepts from the English School. It argues that populist nationalism exposes a problem of internal dissensus on the future trajectories of solidarist international society, within the Western states that have traditionally been its principal supporters. The 'populist moment' reveals problems of disconnection between domestic publics, the practices, and institutions of contemporary international society, and state actions that are premised in part on ethical regard for non-citizens. The article contends that, as an interface point between rooted communities and global ethical concerns, progressive foreign policy approaches have an important role to play in ameliorating these disconnections. However, these approaches must look beyond a simple 're-booting' of liberal internationalism, focussing instead on building a path towards solidarist international society that is rooted in everyday-lived experiences, communities, and identities within the state. Building upon theorizations of good international citizenship, the article advances an alternative framework of good global statehood, which draws upon a coproduction methodology as a means of creating progressive foreign policies that are better attuned to pluralism and diversity across, but also within state borders.
引用
收藏
页码:79 / 105
页数:27
相关论文
共 123 条
[91]  
Narayan J, 2016, THEOR GLOB AGE, P1, DOI 10.9760/MUPOA/9781526101020
[92]  
Norris P, 2019, CULTURAL BACKLASH: TRUMP, BREXIT, AND AUTHORITARIAN POPULISM, P1, DOI 10.1017/9781108595841
[93]   Toward a globally sensitive patriotism [J].
Nussbaum, Martha C. .
DAEDALUS, 2008, 137 (03) :78-93
[94]   Foreign policy gaps between citizens and leaders [J].
Page, BI ;
Barabas, J .
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES QUARTERLY, 2000, 44 (03) :339-364
[95]   Populism and Foreign Policy: The Case of India [J].
Plagemann, Johannes ;
Destradi, Sandra .
FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS, 2019, 15 (02) :283-301
[96]  
POPESCU I., 2018, Orbis vol, V62-1, P91, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.ORBIS.2017.11.011
[97]   Why America's Grand Strategy Has Not Changed: Power, Habit, and the US Foreign Policy Establishment [J].
Porter, Patrick .
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, 2018, 42 (04) :9-46
[98]   DIPLOMACY AND DOMESTIC POLITICS - THE LOGIC OF 2-LEVEL GAMES [J].
PUTNAM, RD .
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION, 1988, 42 (03) :427-460
[100]   Towards parliamentarisation of foreign and security policy? [J].
Raunio, Tapio ;
Wagner, Wolfgang .
WEST EUROPEAN POLITICS, 2017, 40 (01) :1-19