Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Journal Article

The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics

Peter Gourevitch
International Organization
Vol. 32, No. 4 (Autumn, 1978), pp. 881-912
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706180
Page Count: 32
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Add to My Lists
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics
Preview not available

Abstract

The international system is not only an expression of domestic structures, but a cause of them. Two schools of analysis exploring the impact of the international system upon domestic politics (regime types, institutions, coalitions, policies) may be distinguished: those which stress the international economy, and those which stress political-military rivalry, or war. Among the former are such arguments as: late industrialization (associated with Gershenkron); dependencia or core-periphery arguments (Wallerstein); liberal development model (much American writing in the 50s and 60s); transnational relation-modernization (Nye, Keohane, Morse); neo-mercantilists (Gilpin); state-centered Marxists (Schurmann). Arguments stressing the role of war include those which focus on the organizational requirements of providing security (Hintze, Anderson), the special nature of foreign relations (classical political theory), territorial compensation (diplomatic history), and strains of foreign involvement (analysis of revolutions). These arguments provide the basis for criticism of much of the literature which uses domestic structure as an explanation of foreign policy, in particular those which (such as the strong-state weak-state distinction) tend, by excessive focus on forms, to obscure the connection between structures and interests, and the role of politics. These arguments also permit criticism of the notion of a recent fundamental discontinuity in the nature of international relations.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
881
    881
  • Thumbnail: Page 
882
    882
  • Thumbnail: Page 
883
    883
  • Thumbnail: Page 
884
    884
  • Thumbnail: Page 
885
    885
  • Thumbnail: Page 
886
    886
  • Thumbnail: Page 
887
    887
  • Thumbnail: Page 
888
    888
  • Thumbnail: Page 
889
    889
  • Thumbnail: Page 
890
    890
  • Thumbnail: Page 
891
    891
  • Thumbnail: Page 
892
    892
  • Thumbnail: Page 
893
    893
  • Thumbnail: Page 
894
    894
  • Thumbnail: Page 
895
    895
  • Thumbnail: Page 
896
    896
  • Thumbnail: Page 
897
    897
  • Thumbnail: Page 
898
    898
  • Thumbnail: Page 
899
    899
  • Thumbnail: Page 
900
    900
  • Thumbnail: Page 
901
    901
  • Thumbnail: Page 
902
    902
  • Thumbnail: Page 
903
    903
  • Thumbnail: Page 
904
    904
  • Thumbnail: Page 
905
    905
  • Thumbnail: Page 
906
    906
  • Thumbnail: Page 
907
    907
  • Thumbnail: Page 
908
    908
  • Thumbnail: Page 
909
    909
  • Thumbnail: Page 
910
    910
  • Thumbnail: Page 
911
    911
  • Thumbnail: Page 
912
    912
Part of Sustainability