The Role of Hierarchy in International Politics

Abstract

Lake makes a strong case that hierarchy matters. 1 Building on his previous work on the subject, 2 he argues that security and economic hierarchy fundamentally constrain the security behavior of subordinate states in international politics. His approach to the topic, however, raises a variety of questions about how best to deªne, measure, and test the effect of hierarchy in international politics.deªning hierarchy International relations theorists have placed tremendous analytical importance on the role of anarchy in international relations theory, but they have paid much less attention to conceptualizing its antithesis. 3 Lake characterizes hierarchy as a situation "when one unit, the dominant state, possesses authority over a second, subordinate state" (p. 50). Political authority, in turn, is conceived of as a "contract" in which a dominant actor provides "social order" in exchange for a subordinate's "consent" (pp. 54-55).Lake's conception of hierarchy as a social bargain is straightforward, but it is overly narrow. His deªnition precludes relations of hierarchy that are established by coercion. Many of the examples of hierarchy that Lake identiªes, however, such as empires, protectorates, or economic dependencies (pp. 58-61), are the product of brute force, not of mutual interest. Moreover, his deªnition excludes relations of hierarchy that are established by ideational legitimacy. 4 Indeed, many social theorists deªne political authority not as an instrumental calculation but in terms of the logic of appropriateness. A dominant actor possesses political authority by virtue of her status, position, and charisma-not her capacity to bribe. 5 Similarly, when a subordinate actor

Damsels in distress: Fragile masculinity in digital war

“…Not only has it moved beyond the five political sectors where securitization could potentially take place (economic, societal, military, political and environmental), but it also incorporated analysis of gender and race (Gomes and Marques, 2021), as well as moving beyond speech act (Guillaume, 2018) and to everyday practices and discourses (Balzacq et al, 2010; Bigo, 2002). In its original conceptualization, a mere uttering of ‘security’ was enough to place a matter outside the realm of ‘normal politics’ (MacDonald and Lake, 2008) but, in later versions, securitization’s success has been mostly associated with the adoption of extraordinary measures to deal with the existential threat to the referent object.…”

The rise of China between Global IR and area studies: an agenda for cooperation

“…This has generated a number of different debates. For instance, the new hierarchy studies have investigated the possibility of considering hierarchy as an alternative organizing principle for the international order and how hierarchy affects agents' behaviour (MacDonald and Lake, 2008;Mattern and Zarakol, 2016;McConaughey et al, 2018).…”

“…On the other hand, Beijing's new centrality in the region has generated new forms of hierarchies, especially in the economic sector (Li, 2019; Liu and Liu, 2021). The effects of the presence and the possible evolution of this dual hierarchy on the stability of the order, on the compliance with key norms and principles, as well as on the strategies of large and middle powers in the region are likely to be central for IR scholars and area specialists alike in the near future (Loke, 2021). Investigating other pathways to modernity.…”

International hierarchies and contemporary imperial governance: A tale of three kingdoms

“…Why would states ever give away some portion of their sovereign prerogatives? Lake’s account works exclusively on a basis of rational utility-maximizing state actors (a logic of consequences); normative or cultural deference (logic of appropriateness), as well as brute force, are irrelevant to the basic argument (MacDonald, 2008). Thus Lake asserts that hierarchy is an exchange of authority that ‘rests on a bargain between the ruler and ruled premised on the former’s provision of a social order of value sufficient to offset the latter’s loss of freedom.…”