Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Mind of EmpireChina's History and Modern Foreign Relations$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Christopher A. Ford

Print publication date: 2010

Print ISBN-13: 9780813192635

Published to Kentucky Scholarship Online: September 2011

DOI: 10.5810/kentucky/9780813192635.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM KENTUCKY SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.kentucky.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright The University Press of Kentucky, 2022. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in KSO for personal use.date: 28 June 2022

Western Assumptions about International Order

Western Assumptions about International Order

Chapter:
(p.59) 5 Western Assumptions about International Order
Source:
The Mind of Empire
Author(s):

Christopher A. Ford

Publisher:
University Press of Kentucky
DOI:10.5810/kentucky/9780813192635.003.0006

Like China, Europe suffered through crucial formative periods of uncertainty and strife, beginning with the “discovery” and conquest of the New World at the close of the fifteenth century. From 1500 to 1800, Europe went through a long and perilous ordeal of identity formation and contestation. These tribulations destroyed the remnant institutions and assumptions of medieval governance and, ultimately, produced a domestic and international order based on entirely new concepts. These dynamics formed a powerfully pluralist conception of world order in which sovereign states existed side by side in relationships of formal equality and independence. The pervasiveness of this concept, called Western pluralism, can be seen in the writings of European scholars, including Francisco de Vitoria, Francisco Suarez, Alberico Gentili, and Hugo Grotius, that touch on the conceptions of international order. This Westphalian notion of world politics forms a powerful and fascinating counterpoint to Sinic universalism. Whereas Europe emerged from feudalism through the crucible of bitter zero-sum warfare into a postimperial world of formally coequal sovereign powers, China—albeit nearly two millennia earlier—drew precisely opposite conclusions from its own period of interstate struggle. An understanding of these sharply contrasting conceptual paths is necessary to appreciate the tensions that lie at the heart of China's ambivalent modern relationship to international law and the states system.

Keywords:   Europe, international order, state sovereignty, Westphalian pluralism, Sinic universalism, European intellectual tradition, international legal positivism

Kentucky Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .