Abstract
Michael Mann's pioneering work provides insights not just into world history and historical sociology but also promises much for the discipline of International Relations (IR). However, I argue that Mann's theory suffers from a number of internal inconsistencies which, in turn, threaten the integrity of his overall model. Specifically, I claim that importing various neorealist insights into his work threatens Mann's commitment to historical sociology on the one hand and the viability of his multi-causal IEMP model on the other. Moreover, in producing a Eurocentric theory of the rise of the West, Mann simultaneously jeopardises one of his most fundamental of claims: that societies are not bounded but promiscuous entities — that is they are shaped by manifold influences emanating from both within and beyond them. Accordingly, I argue that if Mann can produce a non-realist theory of the international and a non-Eurocentric theory of social and economic change, he will be able to improve on his theoretical approach and maintain the spirit of the enterprise for which he has become justly famous.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.