182 Notes
- Pamela B. De Vinne, ed., The American Heritage: Illustrated Encyclopedic Dic-
tionary (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1987), p. 807b. - De Vinne, The American Heritage, p. 425b.
- Jervis, System Effects, p. 127 fn. 3.
- Bruce Bueno De Mesquita argues that system-transforming wars can be
small. A small event—the Seven Weeks’ War of 1866—fundamentally changed
the international order by providing the foundation for German hegemony on
the European continent. Bruce Bueno De Mesquita, “Pride of Place: The Origins
of German Hegemony,” World Politics, Vol. 43, No. 1 (October 1990), pp. 28–53,
at p. 28. - Graham Evans and Jeffrey Newnham, The Penguin Dictionary of International
Relations (London: Penguin Books, 1998), p. 170. - Evans and Newnham, The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations, p. 170.
- Arturo Rosenblueth, Norbert Wiener, and Julian Bigelow, “Behavior, Pur-
pose and Theology,” Philosophy of Science, Vol. 10, No. 1 (January 1943), pp. 18–24,
at p. 19. - Rosenblueth, Wiener, and Bigelow, “Behavior, Purpose and Theology,” p. 19.
- EAST GERMAN UPRISING (ICB #141); POLAND LIBERALIZATION (ICB
#154); HUNGARIAN UPRISING (ICB #155); PRAGUE SPRING (ICB #227); SOLI-
DARITY (ICB #315). - Ofer Israeli, “Did Bush Save America?” Jerusalem Post, April 22, 2010.
- Colin McInnes, “A Different Kind of War? September 11 and the United
States’ Afghan War,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 29, No. 2 (2003), pp. 165–
184, at p. 170. - Legro and Moravcsik, “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” pp. 17–18.
- Frankel, “Restating the Realist Case,” pp. xii–xiv.
- The current study adopts the argument of Legro and Moravcsik whereby
while classic realists have focused on restrictions forced on countries by distribu-
tion of material resources and have rejected the influence of democracy, ideology,
economic integration, the law, and institutions of the political world, researchers
have turned from defensive realism and neoclassic realism to a new definition of
realism, which denies these traditional counterarguments. This action has caused
them to slide toward liberal, epistemic, and institutional theories. Legro and
Moravcsik, “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” - Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, p. 9.
- Robert G. Gilpin, “No One Loves a Political Realist,” in Benjamin Frankel,
ed., Realism, Restatements and Renewal (New York: Frank Cass, 1996), chapter 3,
pp. 3–26; Kenneth N. Waltz, “Realist Thought and Neorealist Theory,” Journal of
International Affairs, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Spring/Summer 1990), pp. 21–37, at p. 37. - Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, p. 9.
- Aron, Peace and War, p. 6.
- Francis Fukuyama, “Challenges to World Order After September 11,” in
William I. Zartman, ed., Imbalance of Power: US Hegemony and International Order
(Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2009). - Waltz, Theory of International Politics.
- These hypotheses are controversial and there are other theories of the state
system besides Waltz’s neorealism. Wendt, for example, offers a theory of a state
system that criticizes Waltz’s neorealist theory. Wendt, Social Theory of International
Politics.