Historical accounts of the social sciences have too often accepted local or national institutions as a self-evident framework of analysis, instead of considering them as being embedded in transnational relations of various kinds. Evolving patterns of transnational mobility and exchange cut through the neat distinction between the local, the national, and the inter-national, and thus represent an essential component in the dynamics of the social sciences, as well as a fruitful perspective for rethinking their historical development. In this programmatic outline, it is argued that a transnational history of the social sciences may be fruitfully understood on the basis of three general mechanisms, which have structured the transnational flows of people and ideas in decisive ways: (a) the functioning of international scholarly institutions, (b) the transnational mobility of scholars, and (c) the politics of trans-national exchange of nonacademic institutions. The article subsequently examines and illustrates each of these mechanisms.

The study of international relations (IR) took an important disciplinary turn in the 1950s, when a number of scholars sought to develop a distinct theory of international politics. This turn, however, should not be understood as a tendency toward specialization, but rather as a separatist movement, meant to insulate the study of international politics from the behavioral revolution that was transforming the practice of political science in postwar America. Promoted by the Rockefeller Foundation, the “theorization” of IR encapsulated a very specific intellectual and ultimately political agenda at odds with the kind of liberalism dominant at the time.

Philanthropic practices allow the dominant classes to generate knowledge about society and regulatory prescriptions, in particular by promoting the development of the social sciences. Th e 19th century industrialists had often invested their resources in the definition and treatment of relevant social issues, in order to institutionalize the new form of capitalism they represented. In the late 20th century, the new transnationalized social strata representing the hegemony of financial capital, whose power depends on their capacity to perpetuate the new socioeconomic order, used similar strategies. Philanthropy offers a privileged strategy for generating new forms of "policy knowledge" convergent with the interests of their promoters. Focusing on the Central European University founded by the financier George Soros, the paper argues that, far from seeking to curb the excesses of economic globalization, such efforts are actually institutionalizing it by laying the foundations of its own regulatory order.

Neorealism is one of the most influential theories of international relations, and its first theorist, Kenneth Waltz, a giant of the discipline. But why did Waltz move from a rather traditional form of classical realist political theory in the 1950s to neorealism in the 1970s? A possible answer is that Waltz's Theory of International Politics was his attempt to reconceive classical realism in a liberal form. Classical realism paid a great deal of attention to decisionmaking and statesmanship, and concomitantly asserted a nostalgic, anti-liberal political ideology. Neorealism, by contrast, dismissed the issue of foreign policymaking and decisionmaking. This shift reflected Waltz's desire to reconcile his acceptance of classical realism's tenets with his political commitment to liberalism. To do so, Waltz incorporated cybernetics and systems theory into Theory of International Politics, which allowed him to develop a theory of international relations no longer burdened with the problem of decisionmaking.

Résumé Les comptes rendus historiques du développement des sciences sociales ont trop souvent considéré les institutions locales ou nationales comme le cadre d'analyse pertinent, au lieu de prendre en compte leur insertion dans divers types de relations transnationales. L'évolution des structures de mobilité et d'échanges transnationaux met à mal les distinctions nettes entre le local, le national et l'international, et représente une composante essentielle de la dynamique des sciences sociales, ainsi qu'une perspective prometteuse pour repenser leur développement historique. Dans l'esquisse programmatique qui suit, nous suggérons qu'il est possible de concevoir une histoire transnationale des sciences sociales à partir de trois mécanismes généraux qui ont structuré de façon décisive les flux transnationaux d'individus et d'idées : a) le fonctionnement des institutions scientifiques internationales, b) la mobilité transnationale des universitaires, et c) les politiques d'échanges transnationaux poursuivies par des institutions non-universitaires.

No abstract

Résumé La lutte pour la démocratie et les droits de l’homme – qui forme de plus en plus la toile de fond de la politique étrangère américaine – est le terrain sur lequel s’est progressivement constitué un nouveau champ de pratiques internationales, situé à l’articulation de l’expertise et de l’activisme. Pour comprendre la dynamique de ce champ où l’impérialisme symbolique se distingue mal des luttes pour l’émancipation, on se propose de montrer qu’il s’est formé, de façon paradoxale, à partir des oppositions qui ont profondément travaillé le champ savant au cours de la guerre froide. Car, à côté des néo-conservateurs et des vétérans de l’anticommunisme qui ont inauguré ce type d’activisme international, les nouveaux professionnels de la démocratie sont aussi très souvent des universitaires issus des luttes anti-impérialistes des années 1970 et des mouvements pour les droits de l’homme. Or, c’est précisément en s’opposant, que ces acteurs vont contribuer à l’émergence d’un véritable marché de l’expertise hégémonique qui transcrit sur le mode de la compétition professionnelle – et, par conséquent, de l’esprit de corps – les luttes politiques dans lesquelles ils étaient engagés.

No abstract