Stratified world-making in international relations: stratification, order, and power
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This thesis develops an account of a phenomenon called ‘stratified world-making’ in international relations. This account takes its cue from sociological studies of social imagery, while also building on extant accounts of stratification in world politics. Specifically, stratified world-making draws our attention to how state actors in international relations are attempting to discursively naturalise, reify, and impose their preferred stratified ‘social pictures’ or stratified ‘model of international society’ upon certain contexts so that their immediate interests become more easily realisable. These stratified models of international society are the hierarchical ‘mental maps’ that shape how actors perceive and interpret how international society is stratified. These images position not just the self but also others in ways that allow stratified world-makers to pursue their interests more effectively. I provide a general account of the politics of stratified world-making, theorising three general, recurring varieties or strategies of this phenomenon, each consisting of a particular stratified model of international society. The first of these is ‘middling’, which sees an actor attempting to impose a vision of the world as tripartite, with the actor claiming they hold a position in the ‘middle’ of this society in order to break out of the disempowering category of the ‘lower’ stratum. The second strategy is ‘reverse othering’, wherein subordinate actors construct a world of manipulative, corrupt ‘haves’, which are contrasted with the weak, poor, powerless, yet humble and deserving ‘have nots’, in order to facilitate some concessions to the ‘have nots’. The third and final strategy is ‘flattening’, which involves actors claiming that the world is one of ‘equals’, often to reduce the ability of stronger actors to do what they want to weaker ones. I empirically illustrate and explore the logic(s) of each of these strategies using an emblematic historical case study. ‘Middling’ is explored through Australian and Canadian efforts to suggest the international system was not composed only of ‘great’ and ‘small’ powers but also ‘middle powers’ in the 1940s. I analyse ‘reverse othering’ by examining how developing states constructed the world in the 1974 Sixth Special Session at the UN General Assembly about a New International Economic Order. The dynamics of ‘flattening’ are studied using Latin American states’ efforts to codify ‘sovereign equality’ and its attendant rights as a principle of international law in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The thesis makes a number of contributions to the literatures on stratification and stratified international orders. The first is the original conceptual framework and the three strategies of stratified world-making I identify. The second contribution qualifies conventional wisdom about the relationship between ambiguity and stratification. While existing accounts argue ambiguity can often be an obstacle to actors’ ambitions, my framework shows how the ambiguity, fuzziness, and indeterminacy of the social world also opens up opportunities for actors. Finally, the thesis opens up potentially fruitful pathways for practices of recognition and accommodation to satisfy the stratificatory ambitions of actors in world politics.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,038 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».