For a further discussion of these two approaches, see N.J. Rengger and M. Hoffman, 'Modernity, Postmodernism and International Relations' in J. Doherty , E. Graham and M. Malek (eds.), Postmodernism and the Social Sciences (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1991).
2.
The first two strategies have strong affinities with Lapid's call for a 'systemic reconstruction'; the last two are more closely aligned with Lapid's category of 'celebratory attitude'. See Y. Lapid, 'The Third Debate: on the Prospects of International Theory in a Post-positivist Era', International Studies Quarterly (Vol. 33, No. 3, 1989), pp. 235-54.
3.
Linklater further develops this theme in 'The Problem of Community in International Relations', Alternatives (Vol. 14, No.2, 1990), pp. 135-53.
4.
Andrew Linklater, Men and Citizens in International Theory, Second Edition ( London: Macmillan, 1990).
5.
Andrew Linklater, Beyond Realism and Marxism: Critical Theory and International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1990 ), p. 14.
6.
Ibid, p.171.
7.
Ibid, p. 32.
8.
Ibid, p. 163.
9.
Aspects of this element of Linklater's project are arguably developed in R.W. Cox, Production, Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1987).
10.
Linklater, op.cit, in note 5, p. 171.
11.
Ibid, note 12, pp.194-95.
12.
This term is drawn from Y. Lapid, op.cit., in note 2.
13.
Nicholas Onuf , World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1989), p. 1.
14.
Ibid, p. 27.
15.
Ibid, p. 128.
16.
Ibid, p. 168.
17.
Ibid, p. 221.
18.
Ibid, pp. 288-89.
19.
For approaches in international theory which parallel Onuf's 'constructivism'. but without recourse to Wittgenstein, see A. Wendt, 'The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory', International Organization (Vol, 41. No. 3, 19873, pp. 335-70; D. Dessler, 'What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate?', International Organization (Vol. 43, No. 3, 1989), pp. 441-47; and A. Wendt, 'Sovereignty and the Social Construction of Power Politics', (unpublished manuscript, 1990). For a discussion of Wittgenstein and international theory which pushes in a different direction than Onuf, see J. George and D. Campbell, 'Patterns of Dissent and the Celebration of Difference: Critical Social Theory and International Relations'. International Studies Quarterly (Vol. 34, No. 3, 1990), pp. 269-94.
20.
This terminology is drawn from R. Ashley, 'Living on Border Lines: Man, Post structuralism and War', in J. Der Derian and M. Shapiro (eds.), International Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings in World Politics ( Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1989).
21.
James Der Derian and Michael Shapiro (eds.), International Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings in World Politics (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1989), pp. 6-7.
22.
Ibid, p. 8.
23.
Ibid, p. 278.
24.
Ibid, p. 260.
25.
Ibid, p. 284.
26.
Ibid, p. 284.
27.
Ibid, p. 331.
28.
Ibid, p. 336.
29.
Ibid.
30.
Ibid, p. 338.
31.
Ibid, p. 339.
32.
R.B.J. Walker and Saul H. Mendlovitz (eds.), Contending Sovereignties: Redefining Political Community (London: Lynne Reinner Publications, 1990), p. 6.
33.
Ibid, p. 80.
34.
Ibid, p. 182.
35.
Ibid, p. 35.
36.
Ibid, p. 89.
37.
This is developed in R. Ashley, 'Untying the Sovereign State: A Double Reading of the Anarchy Problematique', Millennium: Journal of International Studies (Vol. 17, No. 2, 1988), pp. 227-62.
38.
This 'view from the margins' is further developed in the contribution to the 'Special Issue: Speaking the Language of Exile: Dissidence in International Studies', International Studies Quarterly (Vol. 34, No. 3, 1990), edited by R. Ashley and R.B.J. Walker.
39.
Walker and Mendlovitz, op. cit, in note 32, p. 182.
40.
This theme and its implications for international theory are more fully discussed in N.J. Rengger , 'Incommensurability, International Theory and the Fragmentation of Western Political Culture', in J. Gibbins (ed.), Contemporary Political Culture (London: Sage, 1989).
41.
D. Dessler , 'What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate? ', International Organization (Vol. 43, No. 2, 1989), pp. 441-74.
