From: Dogan Goecmen (Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM)
Date: Sat Oct 21 2006 - 14:22:55 EDT
Dear Paul, I thank you very much for your email. The paper has been published in the Turkish journal "Praksis" , Vol 11, pp. 49-82. There is no English version of it yet. I am interetsted in the conference as well as in RESEARCH's plans about publishing a paper on Luxemburg's approach to national question. May I ask you give some more information please - via the list or off-list which ever you like. I thank you very much again. Regards, Dogan. In einer eMail vom 21.10.2006 14:35:08 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit schreibt zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU: Dogan, You may be interested to know that there will be a Rosa Luxemburg conference in Tokyo next April 1-2. Also, Vol. 24 of the RESEARCH expects to have an article addressing Luxemburg on the national question. In any case, could you privately send me that whole paper? Paul Z. ************************************************************************** THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11-2001 --"a benchmark in 9/11 research", review Volume 23 (2006), RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY, P. Zarembka, ed, Elsevier *********************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Dogan Goecmen wrote: > > Rosa Luxemburg’s Critical Realism and the Foundations of International > Politics > > Abstract > > DoÄŸan Göçmen > > This paper explores the foundational aspects of Luxemburg’s theory of > international > Politics. She develops a theoretical approach to international politics, > which > may be described as a critical realist one. Luxemburg works out her approach > to > international politics in a discussion with and in a criticism of three > competing > schools: social contract theories, moralist approach and realism. Her main > argument > against these schools is that their principles do not and cannot serve as a > foundation of international politics. With regard to social contract > theories as > operationalized in international politics: according to Luxemburg the > fundamental assumptions of social contract theories cannot be the basis of > international politics > because their principles such as mutual equality and recognition do not have > any > validity in the age of capitalism. Luxemburg rejects laying down these > principles to > international politics not because she rejects accepting these principles > from a > normative point of view. On the contrary, she is convinced that they should > be the > sole foundation of international relations. They cannot, however, be the > foundation > of international politics in our age capitalism as it is taken for granted > in social > contract theories. Luxemburg formulates almost the same critique with regard > to the moralist approach. In order that morals can be said to serve as a > foundation > of international politics its fundamental premises must be actuality. That > is to > suggest that before morals can be said to serve the foundation of > international relations there must be valid a moral system throughout the world with > some sort of > binding character. However, in the capitalist-imperialist age because of > dominant > social class relations there exist many diverse moral values; thus, morals > cannot > serve as the foundation of international relations. Luxemburg concludes that > the > principle that serves as a foundation of international politics in the age > of capitalism > is power relations. After having thus criticised social contract theories and > moralist approach from a realist point of view Luxemburg turns to the > criticism of > realist approach. She differentiates between official positivist and > reformist positivist > realism. Unlike the latter, the former justifies the existing principle of > power > relations without any regard to their consequences. Unlike the official > positivist realism, and without questioning its very logic, the reformist > positivist realism formulates reformist critique of power relations from a moralist > point of view. However, according to Luxemburg, any critique of power > relations ends up in some > sort of positivism if it does not question their foundations. After having > developed > her primary approach to international relations, Luxemburg turns to the > criticism > of imperialism. In this context I refer also to Luxemburg’s critique of a > certain type > of a theory of international politics, which may be seen from our point of > view as > a critique of new institutionalism. Luxemburg’s criticism of imperialism, as > I argue > in this paper, shows how morality, that is, the principles of mutual > equality and > recognition is possible. > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 31 2006 - 00:00:03 EST