Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered

A Reply to Farber and Gowa and to Mansfield and Snyder

Bibliographic Data

ID6286033
AuthorsWilliam R Thompson (0000-0002-7022-585X, Indiana University), Richard P Tucker (0000-0001-8552-5401, Harvard University), Richard Tucker (0000-0001-9989-251X, Harvard University)
Year1997
Volume41
Issue3
Pages462-477
Publication date1997-06-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Conflict Resolution (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0022-0027 • E-ISSN: 1552-8766
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0022002797041003008
OpenAlexW2106958751
LanguageEN
Citations received19
References cited15

Our entire field of study has become bewitched with the question(s) of democratic peace. The idea that domestic institutions and/or democratic norms could somehow be responsible for increasing tendencies toward more pacific behavior in international relations (at least among some states) has galvanized a variety of reactions. Some realists and neorealists reject the basic idea out of hand because it conflicts with their assumptions about the preponderance of anarchy and security dilemmas. Other realists, however, have enthusiastically embraced the possibility of elevating secondimage explanations over others considered somehow less tangible. Liberals and neoliberal institutionalists, of course, sense things are swinging their way again after a long drought of realpolitik. Post-cold war triumphalists are equally sure that their side won because of the moral superiority of their own values and institutions, which just happen to reside at the core of the democratic peace arguments. Quantitative analysts, for their part, are relieved to have empirical findings that seem to hold up to closer scrutiny and, in some eyes, may approximate the holy grail of law-like propositions. Policy advocates are delighted to have an opportunity to invoke international relations theory and empirical findings to justify their preferred real-world strategies. Thus, the democratic peace question manages to simultaneously invoke sentiments of ideology, paradigmatic preferences, and applied policy proclivities. Perhaps it is little wonder, then, that our exchanges on the subject are more likely to reflect polarization than to shed additional light on interesting processes. That having been said, we must still admit to being a bit bothered and even slightly bewildered by the reactions of Farber and Gowa and of Mansfield and Snyder. Our

Argument (complex analysis · Democracy · Economics · Epistemology · Ideology · Law and economics · Mainstream · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Realpolitik · Scrutiny · Sociology · Wonder · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Philosophy · Political Conflict and Governance

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub