1
سیاسی و روابط بین الملل::
دولت-جامعه
Although the place of historical sociology within sociology suffered from the broader discipline's diversion into abstract theorising and its turf-wars with cognate rivals, historical sociology experienced something of a renaissance during the late 1970s and early 1980s, around the time that a wave of self-consciously historical sociological work began to appear in IR.2 Over the last twenty years, the nexus between these two fields - historical sociology and IR - has borne substantial fruit: analysis of the origins and varieties of international systems over time and place (Watson 1992, Spruyt 1994, Buzan and Little 2000), exposure of the 'myth of 1648' (Osiander 2001, Teschke 2003), analysis of the non-Western origins of the contemporary world system (Wallerstein 1995, Gills 2002, Hobson 2004), work on the co-constitutive relationship between the international realm and state-society relations in processes of radical change (Halliday 1999, Lawson 2005a), examination of the social logic of international financial orders (Seabrooke 2006), and exploration of the international dimensions of modernity itself (Rosenberg 1994a, 2006).
To achieve this, he argues for a structurationist approach, which notes that state-society complexes are agents that both constitute, and are constituted by, socio-domestic and international/global structures.
Bor-rowing the phrase from Buzan and Little, he argues that we need a 'thick' conception of the international, and by extension, a thick conception of the state-society complex, which implies that international and domestic structures are co-constituted and are fundamentally embedded within a series of social relationships.
In essence, he begins by bracketing state-society agency and focuses on the international and domestic structural forces that pushed continental states to shift from relatively free trade back to tariff protectionism after 1877.
واژگان شبکه مترجمین ایران