Is Kaliningrad’s ‘offshore’ Status Symptomatic of a “hollowing out” of the Russian State?
In the shift from a Fordist to a post-Fordist international economic system, neo-Schumpeterian theorists have come to anticipate a “hollowing out” of the state, in which sovereignty is displaced ‘upward, downward, and, to some extent, outward.’ In this transition, subnational entities are afforded an increasing prominence on the international stage; no longer simply an extension of the Keynesian welfare state, tasked with ‘offloading fiscal demands from national state treasuries’, but ‘important partners in promoting exports and attracting foreign direct investment.’
How do Postmodernists Analyse International Relations?
Attempts to define the strand of postmodern theory in the field of contemporary international relations are often overwhelmed by the challenge of having ‘to make intelligible some of the different problematique, focii, and theoretical strategies’. As opposed to the analyses of traditional theoretical strands, which attempt to represent their approach as a coherent and unified theory, any analysis of the postmodern must be prepared to navigate what Lapid describes as a ‘confusing array of only remotely related philosophical articulations,’ which shelter beneath the ‘rather loosely patched-up umbrella’ of postmodernity.
Which Theoretical Approach to IR, if any, Should be Seen as Heir to the Hegelian Inheritance?
As a result of the fact that ‘most secondary works on Hegel’s political philosophy neglect its international dimension or tend to limit the latter to [his] account of war’, it would seem that the full scope of Hegelian thought has had a limited impact on contemporary international theory. Appearances can be deceiving. While we might not find many international theorists who would actively identify as Hegelians, Hegel’s work has informed many different strands of international theory, often in unexpected ways.
