"The shift in ideas and the power of the human will shaped the world today," says Friedrich Hayek (1899–1992). Ideas profoundly influence people's thoughts, beliefs, customs and political attitudes, and they are things that are deeply rooted in the spirit of people's hearts and give them a subtle and huge influence in the process of people's views of themselves, others and other things in the world.
It is generally believed that the core of the struggle for international power and international politics is the struggle for international order. On the surface, the international order is an international pattern formed by the competition of strength between the main actors in a certain period of time, and thus created. But from a deeper level, the distribution of ideas within the international system is the key variable that determines whether the international order can be established and maintained. Therefore, behind the establishment of the international system is the result of the competition of concept distribution, and the result of the dominant position of mainstream concepts and value orientations in the process of "two-tier competition" at the unit and system level.
At the unit level, the perceptions of foreign policymakers constrain the formulation of a country's foreign policy. The ideas of the country's top decision-makers are not only closely related to their own values, but also reflect the traditions, moral values, religious beliefs and ideologies of a particular country. The way of thinking, basic values or political concepts of a national leader is necessarily influenced by domestic politics and a specific conceptual atmosphere; on the other hand, the reason why a leader can be widely accepted and recognized by the people is that his words and deeds can conform to the spirit of the country, embody the common values of his own nation, and represent the interests of the country.
From the perspective of the decision-making process, "what matters is how the individual or group perceives the environment, not what it is exactly.". External information is usually made meaningful only after being selectively filtered and absorbed through the "lens" of the decision-maker's ideas and motivations.
This paper attempts to explore how the competition of concept distribution affects and shapes the renewal and change of the international system from the perspective of concept or intellectual history.
Since the beginning of modern international relations in 1648, there have been four international systems, namely the Westphalian system, the Vienna system, the Versailles-Washington system, and the Yalta system. Corresponding to and dominant ideas are statism, conservatism, radicalism, nationalism and liberalism. We can further divide this into four periods: the period of the Westphalian system dominated by statism, the Period of the Vienna System dominated by conservatism, the Versailles-Washington system dominated by radicalism, and the period of the Yalta System, where nationalism and liberalism were intertwined.
It should be noted that the establishment of any kind of system must be accompanied by the establishment of a dominant concept (norm), but the process of generating the dominant concept is not achieved overnight, but there is a cycle, that is, the process of competition that rises, diffuses/popularizes, internalizes, and finally establishes its dominant position. However, once established, the dominant concept becomes a "collectively held concept of behavior" and a "social structure", that is, international norms, which in turn restrict behavior, construct identities, shape interests, and lead to changes in the international system.
The shaping and impact of the competitive process of concept distribution on the changes in the four major international systems can be said to be no less than the role and influence of strength or power on the international system.
I. The period of the Westphalian system dominated by statism
The Peace of Westphalia established the norms governing modern international relations based on equality and sovereignty. On May 15, 1648, the Treaty of Münster, one of the Peace of Westphalia, was approved in Münster, in the Westphalian region of the Holy Roman Empire. Painted by the Dutch painter Gerard ter Borch (1617 – 1681).
During the Period of the Westphalian System, the Catholic Church's concept of theocracy of grand unity was broken, and the dominant concept was transformed from the supremacy of clerical power to the supremacy of national sovereignty, replacing the theology with nationalism.
During this period, the idea that gradually came to dominate was not individualism, scientism, naturalism, or even nationalism characterized by liberalism, but nationalism, that is, a consciousness and concept that emphasized the supremacy of national interests and the construction of a strong state. This shift in dominant ideas was finally established through the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Thirty Years' War.
The first to break the inhibitions of theology was the movement known as the "Renaissance" that arose in Italian cities in the 14th century, then spread to the countries of Western Europe, and flourished in Europe in the 16th century. It is an ideological and cultural movement that advocates reason, pays attention to secular life, demands that man be freed from the shackles of religion and theocracy, and directly reflects the growing bourgeois demands of the countries of Western Europe.
The Italian poet Dante Alighieri (1265-1321) pointed out in his famous book De Monarchia that the premise of human earthly happiness is peace, but peace is unthinkable without the guarantee of national unity; and to achieve national unity, power must be concentrated in the hands of the monarch. In this way, proceeding from the humanistic ideal of man's earthly happiness, he for the first time clearly put forward the major proposition of the era that the country must be unified and the royal power must be strengthened.
The Italian political thinker Niccolò Machiavelli (1461-1527) for the first time abandoned the traditional view of religious morality and put forward a set of utilitarian theories of the state from the basis of "human evil", and is known as the founder of modern Western nationalist theory. He advocated a republican form of government, but also believed that the political conditions of the time could only rely on the monarchy to oppose the Roman church and feudal forces. He advocated the national interest as the sole norm of political conduct, for which the monarch could do whatever it took; diplomacy depended on strength, without the need to restrain itself with morality and promises.
The French political thinker Jean Bodin (1530-1596), the founder of the theory of state sovereignty, was the first to systematically discuss the concept of sovereignty and, in his masterpiece Les Six livres de la République, defined state sovereignty as "the highest, absolute, eternal power of the state above citizens and subjects." Then, for the first time, he expressed in explicit terms "the secularization of state power" and that "sovereign people are not accountable to anyone but the immortal God." In addition, for the first time, he made a comprehensive and systematic exposition of the nine signs or powers contained in sovereignty, such as legislation, decision on foreign policy, appointment of officials, demand of national allegiance, exercise of supreme judicial adjudication, pardon of criminals, coinage, provision for weights and measures and taxation, and their inseparable, non-transferable, and unrestricted limitations, thus laying the theoretical foundation for all modern state doctrines.
The Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) established the principle of "the highest internal and independent" of national sovereignty, and for the first time made international relations the object of political science. By distinguishing between ancient Rome's civil law based on individuals and contracts and international law based on sovereign states, he made international relations transcend customs and practices, had common norms, and for the first time proposed that sovereign states were the subjects of international law, thus laying the foundation for international law. His theory of international law had a positive impact on the precedent set by the Thirty Years' War for the settlement of disputes by conferences and the formation of the first system of international relations. The rise of nationalist ideology has accelerated the emergence of national monarchies.
After the Renaissance, the Reformation further pushed Europe to break free of the great shackles of the Middle Ages. The results of the Reformation led directly to the "Thirty Years' War" of 1618-1648. In the war, the conflict between the Protestant-nation-sovereign state and the Catholic-traditional emperor already represented a struggle between two value orientations, and France's entry into the war and the position of choosing the emperor as opposed was a fatal blow to the concept of traditional religious identity. On the Protestant side, sweden, the most important country, King Gustav II Adolf (1594-1632) allied himself with France, a Catholic power led by Cardinal Richelieu (1585-1642), against the German emperor and Catholicism. This is not surprising and puzzling: they use their swords against the pagans at home, while in their foreign policy they disregard the sectarian principles they pursue at home.
Richelieu explained the contradiction between his religious beliefs and political behavior this way: "Man may be immortal, and salvation may await." The nation cannot live forever, and salvation can only be now, otherwise all disasters will not be restored. "This is actually an emphasis on the idea of the supremacy of the state." This idea was undoubtedly a pioneer in the era of medieval morality and religious judgment, and it is no wonder that Kissinger called him "the father of the modern state system."
A series of peace treaties to end the Thirty Years' War, known as the Peace of Westphalia, established the norms governing modern international relations based on equality and sovereignty. In this way, through the "Thirty Years' War", Europe realized the transformation from the feudal system to the Westphalian system, broke the theory of world sovereignty and the supremacy of the clerical power under the papal theocratic regime formed in Europe since the Middle Ages, and established the basic principle of international relations where national sovereignty is supreme, and statism is the ultimate winner of this complex process of competition. The Renaissance movement was not only significant, but also blossomed in Europe. The revival of classical civilization laid the foundation for the spread of humanism, rationalism, individualism and liberal thought. Among them, the spirit of humanism influenced the Reformation, the spirit of exploring the world became the precursor of the modern scientific revolution, and the emphasis on rationality led to the development of the second bourgeois ideological emancipation movement, the Enlightenment.
Proceeding from rationalism, enlightenment thinkers replaced God's revelation with human reason, confronted feudal monarchy, theocracy and privileges with man's natural rights, opposed obscurantism, absolutism and religious superstition, and called for the establishment of a new system of individual freedom, equal rights and political democracy, thus fundamentally shaking the ideological foundation of feudal rule and making full public opinion and theoretical preparations for the bourgeois revolutions in France, the United States and other countries, as well as other revolutions and reforms in Europe and the Americas.
Enlightenment thinkers put forward the doctrine of natural and natural rights. On the question of the origin of the state, they put forward the theory of social contract and the theory of popular sovereignty; on the question of the form of state government, they advocated the practice of constitutional democracy, the equality of all people in law, and clearly put forward the theory of the separation of powers, systematically put forward the bourgeois political theory, and established a mature political blueprint for the ideal society of the future.
The Enlightenment stimulated a sense of participation in bourgeois democratic politics. The Declaration of Independence of the United States in 1776 and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen adopted in the French Revolution in 1789 were the crystallization of the achievements of enlightenment ideas, and realized the concretization and legalization of the basic ideas of the Enlightenment. In the first half of the 18th century, Enlightenment ideas spread widely in the North American colonies, and democracy and national consciousness grew throughout North America, which led to the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War.
In the French Revolution, the French bourgeoisie took the enlightenment as the banner and promoted the deepening of the revolution. The French Revolution established the modern concept of revolution, especially the idea of "popular sovereignty", which was vividly displayed during the reign of the Jacobins. At the same time, the political ideas of liberalism and nationalism that were born out of the revolution spread throughout Europe by Napoleon's army, and these ideas dominated the political landscape of the 19th and early 20th centuries.
The period of the Vienna system dominated by conservatism
The scene from the signing of the Final Protocol of the Vienna Conference on 9 June 1815 was painted by the French painter Jean-Baptiste Isabey (1767-1855).
The magnificent Enlightenment promoted the development of liberalism in Europe and North America, and influenced and promoted the bourgeois revolution in Europe and the United States. But with Napoleon's defeat in the war, the two major subversive forces unleashed by the Revolution— liberalism and nationalism— were also suppressed.
The Napoleonic Wars were a struggle between the newly born capitalist system and the traditional feudal system in Europe at that time, the defeat of the predecessors of the war ended, the old autocratic system in Europe was restored, conservatism was once rampant, and the conservative governments throughout Europe were committed to maintaining the old order throughout Europe. Austrian Prime Minister Klemens von Metternich (1773-1859) acted as the architect of the Vienna Peace Conference, based on the ideas of world politics before the French Revolution. Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord (1754-1838) flexibly put forward the principle of "orthodoxy", which satisfies the "balance of power in Europe" of the feudal lords of various countries, represents the common desire to restore the old European system, and becomes the banner of the conference.
On June 9, 1815, Britain, Russia, Austria, Prussia, Portugal, France and Sweden signed the Final Protocol of the Vienna Conference, which mainly involved two items: one was the European territorial system dominated by the four major powers of Russia, Britain, Prussia and Austria, and the other was the political rule system of the feudal "orthodox dynasty" in Europe. The Protocol established the principles of balance of power, orthodoxy and compensation, and subsequently established in Europe a Viennese system to curb capitalist development and revolution and to rebuild European authoritarianism. Thus, the Vienna system was a system in which liberalism and conservatism competed fiercely and eventually dominated by conservatism.
After the establishment of the Vienna system, the balance of power and the maintenance of the status quo in Europe were the dominant ideas of the foreign policy of the European powers, but there were differences in the ways, means and means for the great powers to deal with conflicts of interest. Generally speaking, the diplomatic line represented by Russia is called "conservatism", and the diplomatic line represented by Britain is called "liberalism".
Conservatism manifested itself in the alliance of monarchs established by Russia, Austria, and Prussia on the basis of the "creed of Christianity," the "Holy League." This alliance emphasized the legitimacy of the monarchy and the legitimacy of the feudal absolutism in Europe, believing that once the orthodox order was destroyed, the allied countries should help and support each other like members of the Christian national family in order to maintain normal social order.
On the contrary, Britain's island-state identity, its political and social system, and its pursuit of interests in industry and commerce, which are very different from those of the "Holy Alliance", make it often different from the positions, orientations and practices of these three conservative monarchies on the issue of whether to interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign states, and even have serious differences. Of course, britain often has a similar position with the three countries in maintaining the balance of power and political stability in Europe. Similarly, although France restored the monarchy of the Bourbon dynasty after the Congress in Vienna, after the baptism of the Revolution, the bourgeoisie had won victory over the feudal forces and established representative institutions, and France could not regress to the state it was in before the Revolution of 1789. In foreign policy, France joined Britain in opposing the principle of collective intervention of the Holy Alliance.
Thus, Britain and France followed the principles of liberalism, which opposed the principle of collective intervention in European affairs pursued by the Holy League and the repression of revolutionary movements in Europe by sending troops at every turn. Liberal attitudes toward European nationalities are very different from those of conservatism. These two doctrines existed and functioned simultaneously within the Vienna system, and the antagonisms and principled differences between them were precisely the contrapundiation between two ideas and two doctrines.
However, after entering the 19th century, the decline of feudalism and the rapid development of capitalism were the general trend and could not be prevented by the two principles established at the Vienna Conference. Despite the best efforts of Metternich and the Holy League, Enlightenment ideas and their ideas of industrialism and mass participation gradually became the dominant ideas of the century. New ideologies, especially liberal and nationalist ideas born out of the revolutionary upheavals in France, have gained enormous power and are no longer limited by conservatism.
With the spread of liberal and nationalist ideas, they sparked a series of uprisings and revolutions in the 1820s and 1830s, periodically shaking Europe and forming the revolutionary movement that spread throughout Europe in 1848. At the same time, the natural rights of the Enlightenment thinkers evolved into an infinite pursuit of interests, especially in international relations, and as the overseas colonial expansion of European and American countries became more and more fanatical, the principles pursued in international relations were no longer orthodox, but replaced by naked national egoism.
The development of ideas also echoes the theme of the times. At the turn of the 19th century, the Discussion of Social Change in the West was divided and gave rise to a secular system or ideology of liberalism, radicalism, and conservatism. The ideologies of liberalism and radicalism can be seen as a continuation of the School of Enlightenment; conservatism is a reaction against enlightenment. Theoretically, while the three ideologies share some assumptions, on the whole, they are completely different from each other. The ideology of liberalism is inherently committed to the elimination of socio-political and economic systems that conservatism regards as the soul of society. Radicalism attacked both the proponents of the old system and the self-adjusting liberalism. Conservatism defines its nature as the antithesis of radicalism and liberalism.
But in political practice, the lines between these competing ideas are not very clear and have never been completely separated. Especially in the early decades of the 19th century, it was often difficult to tell where radicalism ended and liberalism and conservatism began. Followers of the three ideologies of liberalism, radicalism, and conservatism often form temporary alliances, and the common good may prompt two of them to form an alliance against the third. In short, the three concepts compete with each other and penetrate each other.
But the publication of the 1859 Book by the British biologist Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882) shook the academic community like a bomb, sparking a heated debate and profoundly changing the three ideologies of liberalism, radicalism and conservatism. Marx also launched a sharp critique of modern society. He believes that the inhuman mode of production in modern society alienates human beings. Marxism advocates the replacement of one conception of modernity, socialism, with another, capitalism.
Darwin's ideas were further elaborated by other theorists. The English sociologist Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) actually published darwin's view of species evolution. However, under the influence of Darwin, he applied the Darwinian concept of survival competition (that is, survival of the fittest) to the economy and society, forming social Darwinism. The German biologist Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919) saw Darwinism as a new universal philosophy of history and political science. Haeckel argues that the history of mankind must be re-examined in the light of man's biological nature, and it will show that human society is controlled by the law of competition and that nations are living beings that must struggle for survival. He introduced Darwinian theory of evolution to Germany, perfected it and gave it the warmest welcome and publicity.
In 1868, the King of Prussia awarded Darwin the Order of the Blue Marques (Pour le Mérite). Darwinism provided the basis for the militarism that led to World War I, and even provided theoretical legitimacy for Nazi national socialism.
Iii. The Period of the Versailles-Washington System dominated by radicalism
The Treaty of Versailles was signed at the Palace of Versailles in Paris on 28 June 1919, marking the official end of world war I.
In the process of the formation and development of the Versailles-Washington system, the competition and cooperation of various concepts has presented an unprecedentedly complex picture in different countries and different societies. The combination of colonialism and monopoly capitalism became imperialism; conservatism and nationalism became militarism; the combination of liberalism and nationalism produced a brilliant Wilsonian idealism and shaped and constructed the Versailles-Washington system. However, as the competition between radicalism and idealism intensified, idealism eventually failed, and nationalism combined with imperialism gave rise to even crazier fascism. Overall, the period was dominated by radicalism.
Radicalism initially led directly to World War I. As for the reasons for the outbreak of the First World War, the American political scientist Joseph Nye argues that "the rise of nationalism, the growth of complacency about peace, social Darwinism, and German policies all led to the loss of flexibility in the international system, which in turn led to the outbreak of the First World War." The Norwegian scholar Torbjorn L. Knutsen argues that industrialism, nationalism and imperialism have undermined the old order, that fierce confrontation between states has filled Europe with tension, and that the assassination of Austrian Crown Prince Franz Ferdinand (b. 1863) on June 28, 1914, merely broke the political deadlock in Europe.
Beginning in the 1870s, free competitive capitalism began a gradual transition to monopoly capitalism. Since then, the intertwining of various nationalist ideologies and nationalism and propaganda has influenced and even dominated the domestic and foreign policies of major European countries such as Germany, France, and Russia to a certain extent. Among them, the most prominent are German pan-Germanism, French revanchism, Russian pan-Slavism and the Serbian Plan for Greater Serbia. These diverse forms of nationalism and the movements they have unleashed have added to the already unstable and brawled Europe many of the risk factors for hostility and confrontation. Joseph Nye argues that "nationalist forces are stronger than socialism in uniting the working class and stronger than capitalism in uniting the bankers." Among monarchies, nationalist forces are indeed stronger than family ties. ”
As European affairs became increasingly tense and competition between nation-states escalated, European countries seized colonies overseas in order to acquire ports, coal refueling stations for their navies, and even only international prestige. This ultra-nationalism manifested itself as colonialism in the era of mercantilism; after the Second Industrial Revolution, monopolies replaced free competition and domination, monopoly capitalism was formed, this ultra-nationalism manifested itself as imperialism, and in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it set off a frenzy of dividing the world, resulting in irreconcilable contradictions between the great powers. Imperialism, colonialism, racism, and class oppression and national slavery exacerbated the suffering of ordinary people all over the world, and socialist thought, as a radical theory of class struggle and class revolution, became the most important radicalism at that time. Lenin's famous thesis was that imperialism inevitably leads to war.
However, from the perspective of competing ideas, liberalism at this time still could not defeat the radicalism represented by ultra-nationalism and other countries, and failed to prevent the outbreak of the First World War. The Allies fought with the Allies in World War I for four years, and how to end the war was quite difficult. U.S. President Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924) urged the belligerent nations to accept "peace without victors." In Russia, on the other hand, after the Bolshevik October Revolution, Lenin promulgated all secret treaties, recommended an immediate truce between the nations, and concluded a peace treaty of "no land and no reparations" to "turn the imperialist war into a domestic (class) war."
Lenin's initiative put Wilson diplomatically into passivity. To this end, President Wilson proposed the famous "Fourteen Points" plan in Congress on January 8, 1918. Wilson's proposals included openly concluding peace treaties to replace clandestine diplomacy, reducing the armaments of States so that they could "fulfill the needs of national security"; and national self-determination so that "all clearly articulated nationalist aspirations can be maximumly satisfied". He also described the First World War as a people's war against "authoritarianism and militarism," two major threats to freedom that could be eliminated only through the creation of democratic governments; and that only "the universal unity of peoples" could guarantee "the same political independence and territorial integrity of large and small states." Wilson replaced classical liberalism with idealism.
The concepts of free trade, national self-determination, and collective security were packaged by Wilson into the new institutional design of the League of Nations. According to American political scientist Amos Perlmutter, "Throughout the 20th century, the two Wilsonian legacies of democracy and national self-determination dominated the principles of U.S. foreign policy and continued to some extent." Further, the concept of "self-determination" proposed by Soviet leader Lenin and US President Wilson destroyed the colonialism that had prevailed in the West for centuries and laid the foundation for the Versailles-Washington system, the Yalta system, and the post-Cold War international system.
But world war I shook the assumptions of liberalism and rationalism in Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and the staggering level of destruction and the death of nearly 10 million people completely changed the concept of progress. After the war, revolutionary ideas and the idea of national self-determination infiltrated the world beyond Europe, where the spirit of nationalism was enlightened, leading to the emergence of nationalist and anti-colonial movements in the Middle East, the Near East and the Far East, as well as the rise of national liberation movements in Asia and Africa, while the post-war economic crisis led to the rise and fall of the workers' movement within the Western world. According to the British political scientist Anthony Arblaster, "When radicalism, expansionism, statism or imperialism and militant socialism occupied the political arena after World War I, the sense of alienation and isolation of liberals deepened considerably." Not only the content of these movements, but also the ideological trends and temperaments of these movements suppress liberals. ”
At the same time, the triumph of Bolshevism and its revolution within Russia laid the foundations for the rise of a new world power. With the Failure of the U.S. Senate to ratify the Treaty of Versailles signed in June 1919 and rejecting Wilson's proposal for a defensive alliance with Britain and France, and the Russian Communist Party withdrawing from world affairs in favor of nurturing its own socialist system, Europe was no longer able to take charge of its own destiny, and a revived Germany quickly filled the political vacuum left by the United States and Russia. This was followed by the rise of fascism in Germany and Italy, as well as elsewhere in Europe, further shattering the dreams of liberalism and social life. Radicalism was once again an overwhelming social trend, and by 1939 only two of Europe's major countries were still democratic: Britain and France. (To be continued)
[This article was originally published in the Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), No. 1, 2018, originally titled: "Conceptual Competition and Change in the International System". The references are omitted, and the text is re-edited and revised by the author after slight additions and deletions. Authorized publication. ]