Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Ian en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2009-03-10T14:58:51Z
dc.date.available 2009-03-10T14:58:51Z
dc.date.issued 2009-01 en_US
dc.identifier http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2009.00778.x en_US
dc.identifier.citation Clark , I 2009 , ' Bringing hegemony back in: the United States and international order ' International Affairs , vol 85 , no. 1 , pp. 23-36 . , 10.1111/j.1468-2346.2009.00778.x en_US
dc.identifier.other PURE: 99377 en_US
dc.identifier.other dspace: 2160/1909 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2160/1909
dc.description.abstract Hegemony suffers from a bad press. It is currently used to refer simply to United States primacy. Thus presented, the US is considered to have been hegemonic since 1945, or at least since 1990. Instead, hegemony is presented here as a legitimate institution of international society in which special rights and responsibilities are conferred on the hegemon. No such hegemony exists at present. However, given today's constellation of power, a circumscribed US hegemony potentially has a distinctive contribution to make to contemporary international order. To map out such a hegemonic institution, this article reviews some historical precedents. It finds that, rather than uniform, these have taken a variety of forms, especially with respect to the scope of the legitimacy and constituency within which they have operated. A scheme of hegemonies—singular, collective and coalitional—is set out as a more realistic way of thinking about hegemony's present potential. en_US
dc.format.extent 14 en_US
dc.relation.ispartof International Affairs en_US
dc.title Bringing hegemony back in: the United States and international order en_US
dc.contributor.pbl Department of International Politics en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Cadair


Advanced Search

Browse

Statistics