Abstract
The present article aims to clarify the connectivity and complementarity of relative and universal affairs in international relations. Believing that, based on the “unity despite plurality” approach, it is possible to have one worldview despite the plurality of methods, it would be possible to have the basic, fixed, general, and universal principles, despite having secondary, multiple, diverse, numerous, changing, and specific models and rules. The article tries to extrapolate the theory of « relative universality » developed by Jack Donnelly as regards the concept of human rights to the main concepts of IR such as sovereignty, State, power, security, gain, national interest, order and values. In response to the question of why the IR concepts are universal and absolute in their pivotal core as well as relative and contextual in their fluid, soft and gelatinous shell, the article concludes, through an explicative method, that it is due to the paradoxical nature of glocalization era in which the dialectics of unity in values and plurality in methods leads to the mutual dynamic interaction of particularity and generality in the framework of « relative universality
Readers can now gain more insights about this research manuscript using chat. Powered by Scholar Lens AI.
BRJ now support Model Context Protocol
BRJ now support Model Context Protocol
Research ID
Universal Unique Research ID
Citation Generator
Cite This Research Manuscript
Your citation will appear here...
Figures
No figures added
References (APA)
- Adler, E. (2005). Communitarian international relations: The epistemic foundations of international relations. Routledge.
- Amiel, Y., & Cowell, F. (1992). Measurement of income inequality: Experimental test by questionnaire. Journal of Public Economics, 47(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(92)90050-P
- Baldwin, D. A. (1985). Economic statecraft. Princeton University Press.
- Bell, D. (1987). The world and the United States in 2013. Daedalus, 116(3), 1–31. [suspicious link removed]
- Biersteker, T. J., & Hall, R. B. (Eds.). (2002). The emergence of private authority in global governance. Cambridge University Press.
- Binsbergen, W. M. J. van, & van Dijk, R. A. (Eds.). (2004). Situating globality: African agency in the appropriation of global culture. Brill.
- Buzan, B. (2007). People, states and fear: An agenda for international security studies in the post-cold war era (2nd ed.). ECPR Press.
- Cai, K. (2011, May 9). Absolute and relative gains in the real world. E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2011/05/09/absolute-and-relative-gains-in-the-real-world/
- Clinton, W. D. (1994). The two faces of national interest. Louisiana State University Press.
- Dahl, R. A., & Lindblom, C. E. (2017). Politics, economics, and welfare. Routledge. (Original work published 1953)
- Donnelly, J. (2003). Universal human rights in theory and practice (2nd ed.). Cornell University Press.
- Donnelly, J. (2007). The relative universality of human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 29(2), 281–306. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2007.0016
- Donnelly, J. (2008). Human rights: Both universal and relative (a reply to Michael Goodhart). Human Rights Quarterly, 30(1), 194–204. [suspicious link removed]
- Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
- Goodhart, M. (2008). Neither relative nor universal: A response to Donnelly. Human Rights Quarterly, 30(1), 183–193. [suspicious link removed]
- Gordon, P. (2003). The evolution of human rights: Visions seen. University of Pennsylvania Press.
- Grieco, J. M. (1988). Anarchy and the limits of cooperation: A realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism. International Organization, 42(3), 485–507. [suspicious link removed]
- Harvey, D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change. Blackwell.
- Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. (1999). Global transformations: Politics, economics and culture. Stanford University Press.
- Hermann, M. G. (2002). One field, many perspectives: Building the foundations for dialogue. International Studies Quarterly, 42(4), 605-608. https://doi.org/10.1111/0020-8833.00109
- Hurrell, A. (2007). On global order: Power, values, and the constitution of international society. Oxford University Press.
- Keohane, R. O. (1986). Reciprocity in international relations. International Organization, 40(1), 1–27. [suspicious link removed]
- Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized hypocrisy. Princeton University Press.
- Manouchehri, A. (2011). Approach and method in political sciences. SAMT.
- Mastanduno, M. (1991). Do relative gains matter? America’s response to Japanese industrial policy. International Security, 16(1), 73–113. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539062
- Munich Security Conference. (2018). Munich security report 2018: To the brink - and back?. https://security-conference.org/en/publications/munich-security-report/munich-security-report-2018/
- Murphy, R. P. (2010). Chaos theory: Two essays on market anarchy (2nd ed.). Ludwig von Mises Institute.
- Naisbitt, J. (1995). Global paradox: The bigger the world economy, the more powerful its smallest players. Avon Books.
- Padgett, S., Zohlnhöfer, R., & Hellström, J. (Eds.). (2010). Developments in German politics 4. Palgrave Macmillan UK.
- Ramonet, I. (1999). Géopolitique du chaos [Geopolitics of chaos]. Gallimard.
- Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. Sage.
- Sani, R. (2009). Under the waves of globalization. Kanoon-e Andishe-ye Javan.
- Schwab, K. (2012, June 13). Address by Professor Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum. International Labour Conference, 101st Session, Geneva. https://www.ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/101stSession/reports/provisional-record/WCMS_181297/lang--en/index.htm
- Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. Random House.
- Wolfers, A. (1952). “National security” as an ambiguous symbol. Political Science Quarterly, 67(4), 481–502. https://doi.org/10.2307/2145138
- Zettili, N. (2001). Quantum mechanics: Concepts and applications. John Wiley & Sons.
