18th Annual International Conference on Politics
& the 18th Annual International Conference on International Studies
15-18 June 2020, Athens, Greece
|1||Heterarchism: Toward Paradigm Shift in World Politics|
Academic Responsible: Dr. Philip G. Cerny, Professor Emeritus , University of Manchester, UK and Rutgers University, USA.
“International Relations” theory has been dominated since the study of IR formally began at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, in 1919 by methodological state-centrism. There have been three mainstream “competing paradigms”—realism, liberalism and constructivism—all of which assume that the dominant independent variables are states and the inter-state system. We argue that this way of conceiving world politics was (a) always problematic and challengeable, and (b) time-bound and increasingly anachronistic. Since the mid-20th century, a dialectic of globalization and fragmentation—political, economic and social processes above, below and cutting across states–has caught states and the interstate system in a complex process of restructuring toward what has been called “heterarchy”. The core of this process is the triangulation of (a) the “dis-aggregated state” (Slaughter 2004), (b) fragmented global governance and “regime complexes” (Alter and Raustiala 2018), and (c) “sectoral differentiation” in the international political economy, leading to a spectrum of market/hierarchy or public/private de facto policymaking processes and diverse types of “mutual capture” between a range of private actors and meso- and micro-state hierarchies. The result is the decreasing capacity of macro-states to control both domestic and transnational political/economic processes. In this context, the nation-state is increasingly becoming what we call a “reactive state” in a world of multilevel and multi-nodal policymaking and implementation processes. This requires a new and robust paradigm that we call “heterarchism”.
Abstract Submitting Form
|2||Global Extremism and the Mitigation of Radicalization|
Academic Responsible: Dr. Christie Kenneth, Professor, Royal Roads University, Canada.
Since 2010, there has been a 58% increase in the number of extreme jihadist groups globally, with states rushing to develop de-radicalization approaches to counter these groups. Global counter-radicalization practices were created to mitigate the spread of radicalization, but these vary from state-sponsored programs to community-based approaches. While countries like Denmark appear to be relatively successful in countering radicalization, the United Kingdom and France continue to suffer from limited success in their implemented policies, with radicalization and attacks increasing in frequency.
This panel deals with the controversial subject of de-radicalization as a tool of the state/Governments in modifying/changing political behavior. The panel specifically focuses on how these governments use counter-terrorism measures to address extremist/ radicalization of individuals. Case studies of a comparative nature, including Western versus Non-Western examples are particularly welcome to shed light on this phenomenon. We will focus on the theory and practice concerning certain questions which are currently inadequately addressed.
These include but are not limited to:
1) What is the context driving such measures from a country, regional and global perspective?
1) How Successful have State policies been at changing extremist forms of behavior?
2) What appears to work best in these scenarios and why?
3) What potential and real impact do such policies have on human rights and the rule of law?
4) Are there political and historical antecedents for state behavior in such measures and what if any lessons have been learned from these?
Abstract Submitting Form