The State as Fallible Nation: An Analysis of Max Weber’s “Social Action Approach” and its Implications for an Alternative IR Model of the State

• Main Authors: Richard Ian Wright, 賴理查
• Other Authors: 陳牧民
• Format: Others
• Language: en_US
• Published: 2019
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/4ng48f

博士 === 國立中興大學 === 國際政治研究所 === 107 === The assumption of the state as a rational unitary-actor has become one of the cornerstones of International Relations theory. One of the great strengths of this parsimonious model is that it facilitates the analytical isolation of systemic constraints on state behavior. However, drawbacks of the model include its exclusion of individual agency, domestic politics, and non-systemic level ideas; reinforcing the inability of mainstream IR theories to account for both non-rational state behavior and the potential for progressive transformations of system process. With this in mind, the current work undertakes an exploration of the possibilities for an alternative to the unitary-actor model. Making use of Max Weber’s individualist methodology, this alternative is envisioned as a pluralistic (as opposed to unitary), and fallible (as opposed to rational) state. This pluralistic-fallible state model is conceptually constituted by various national components, which engage with several sets of multi-scaler institutions. These institutions include socio-cultural institutions—cosmopolitan vs. communitarian; economic institutions—free market vs. interventionist; and two sets of political institutions—democratic vs. authoritarian and solidarist vs. pluralist. The individualist motivations behind these institutions are explored using a modified version of Weber’s social action approach. China/US relations are explored to determine some ways this analytical model might be used to “augment,” rather than “replace,” mainstream analysis. Overall, the image of the state developed here is that of an individually-mediated pluralistic/fallible nation-state. It is my hope that this image can contribute necessary complexity to an IR understanding of the state as the fundamental international actor, without sacrificing too much parsimony.