Abstract
While `world opinion' is a staple in political discourse, the concept has received little attention in IR. Locating it along the `realist—idealist' divide, existing studies have conceptualized `world opinion' empirically, as an aggregative or intersubjective phenomenon, annexed or opposed to state sovereignty, and embodying a normative standard. Drawing on Luhmann's conception of public opinion and Foucault's governmentality approach, this article reconceptualizes `world opinion' discursively (functionally and semantically), as a medium of communication that enables post-sovereign forms of international governance irrespective of an inherent normativity. The alternative conception of `world opinion' is illustrated in the discourse of the emerging United Nations in the early 1940s. In this context, `world opinion' addressed problems concerning the failure of the League of Nations, total war, and threats to `civilization'. With public opinion research as a technical backdrop, `world opinion' underwrote governmentalities of international policing, welfare and rights liberalism, post-colonial pastoralism, and pedagogical panopticism in response to these problems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
