Gain, Fear and Glory

2021 ◽  
pp. 155-172
Author(s):  
Martin Wight

This paper analyses the three causes of war identified by Thucydides and his most eminent translator, Thomas Hobbes. Looking beyond the circumstantial occasions through which wars begin, the chief motives of belligerents have been to pursue material gains, to respond to fears, and to obtain glory and prestige for a doctrine. Wight calls ‘simple Thucydidean fear … the prime motive in international politics’ because it involves ‘a rational apprehension of contingent evil’, not simply ‘some unreasoning emotion’. Wight discusses how fear may be a cause of preventive war, and he labels the great difficulty of building trust between former adversaries ‘the Hobbesian predicament’. Wight defines this predicament as follows: ‘communities of honest and decent men, when they have suffered a long series of mutual injuries, and have a rational apprehension each that its own existence is at stake, and when moreover they live in inescapable juxtaposition, cannot transpose themselves into an attitude of mutual trust’. He also explores the tension between freedom and necessity: the circumstances at hand may seem to be tractable, with choices available between possible decisions and their likely consequences; yet the factors leading to war may prove inescapable.

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 231-241
Author(s):  
Karolina Pobiedzińska

Constant changes in information technology cause changes in many areas of life, therefore, with in the field of management as well. Virtualization, the issue of timelessness in offering services has led to the need for organizations to operate in virtual space - at the distance, thus creating new forms of work. Often, the only way to contact such organization is over the Internet. These contacts concern both the business-customer relationship (B2C), the businessbusiness relationship (B2B) and the relationship between the leader and the employee. Due to the fact there are strong links between trust and virtual space, the purpose of this article is to show how important the trust is in a virtual organization that is operating in a complex, variable reality where employees, entrepreneurs and their customers without mutual trust cannot coexist. Contemporary, modern and learning organizations are oriented to human and only these organizations are able to compete with others. Building trust in complex interactions between participants in a virtual organization is central to interpersonal relationships in general and the foundation for virtual organization functioning.


2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (1) ◽  
pp. 252-253
Author(s):  
Mary Fainsod Katzenstein

When I was an undergraduate in the 1960s, as the Vietnam conflict was escalating, I took Stanley Hoffmann's mesmeriz- ing course, "Causes of War." I thought back to this class as I read Cynthia Enloe's book, which deserves all the superla- tives it has accrued. The experience of reading now and remembering back left me wondering: Without Enloe to consult (her first book on militarism and gender came out in the early 1980s), what were we missing in Hoffmann's class? The answer, I think, is this: We could understand well enough the contending theories about why nations go to war; but in the absence of Enloe, we were less able to ask how militaries could manage such massive mobilizations that required the often calamitous sacrifice of precious lives even for wars whose purposes seemed remote or unconvincing.


2021 ◽  
pp. 143-154
Author(s):  
Martin Wight

This essay focuses on the various motives of decision-makers responsible for state policy. While smaller and weaker powers often choose to capitulate to threats, states prepared to use force have been inspired by distinct combinations of motives. These have included winning independence, imposing domination, promoting allegiance to an ideology, gaining economic advantages, and resisting the rise to supremacy of a political-military competitor. Fear of the loss of security and autonomy may lead to preventive war or intervention to maintain a favourable balance of power. While leaders as prominent as Napoleon and Bismarck have referred to deterministic models of causation in some circumstances, ‘the motive of mutual fear’ may predominate. Compared to their important role in medieval litigation, irredentist wars intended to settle legal and territorial claims have become vestigial, but they may be regarded as modern versions of wars for rights.


2022 ◽  
pp. 73-84

We can use trustworthiness and trust interchangeably because they both relate to the importance of LMX. Trustworthiness, then, is the quality of a person, or a thing, that inspires reliability. The existence of trustworthiness is shown through qualities like being respectful, honest, consistent, positive, and selfless. Leaders who can admit mistakes, acknowledge weakness, applaud strength, and help each other, and who can promote those qualities in the workforce, will be capable of building trust. Mutual trust is important, and everyone has a lot at stake with trust issues because of the inherent risks. Those risks are about putting one's faith or a pending decision in the hands of someone in whom you have not yet developed confidence in, or in whom there are limits to that confidence. Leaders who follow telework policies developed in response to COVID-19 must build trust with subordinates and superiors alike. Trust can then grow as emotions are shared, real understanding developed, and core issues are addressed professionally.


Author(s):  
Martin Wight

This book collects Martin Wight’s works on the theory and philosophy of international politics. It includes classic works, such as “Why Is There No International Theory?” and “Western Values in International Relations,” as well as previously unpublished works such as “The Communist Theory of International Relations” and “Gain, Fear and Glory: Reflections on the Nature of International Politics.” These works encompass four categories: (a) traditions of thinking about international politics since the sixteenth century, (b) the causes and functions of war, (c) international and regime legitimacy, and (d) fortune and irony in international politics. Wight identifies and analyzes three major traditions of thinking about international politics in the West since the sixteenth century: Realism, Rationalism, and Revolutionism, also known as the Machiavellian, Grotian, and Kantian approaches. Wight examines the causes of war highlighted by Thucydides and Hobbes (material interest, fear, and reputation), and considers the functions of war in international politics (such as winning and retaining national independence and upholding the balance of power). Wight reviews the history of dynastic and popular legitimacy as well as post-1945 concepts of international and domestic legitimacy. Finally, Wight considers fortune and irony, including the decision-maker’s frequent rediscovery of the recalcitrance of events. Unintended, unexpected, and ironical consequences abound in international politics. This volume also features eight book reviews by Wight, including his assessments of works by Raymond Aron, E. H. Carr, Friedrich Meinecke, and Hans Morgenthau.


Author(s):  
Laurie M. Johnson

This book has been consistently cited by scholars of international relations who explore the roots of realism in Thucydides' history and the political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes. While acknowledging that neither thinker fits perfectly within the confines of international relations realism, the author proposes Hobbes's philosophy is more closely aligned with it than Thucydides'. The book concludes that Thucydides' approach to politics is more preferable than Hobbes's. Hobbes, despite his pessimistic assumptions about human nature, is not realistic. It also discusses how realism and neorealism, despite their differences, share the same philosophical roots. The book suggests that Thucydides has been misunderstood and that he actually provides an interesting alternative approach to realism in the study of international politics.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 123
Author(s):  
Nur Rachmat Yuliantoro

The relations between two great nations, the United States and China, have attracted the attention of many. Different in several aspects, both countries face a number of challenges and problems in their relationship, ranging from misperception, mutual distrust, and the potential for conflict in the South China Sea as well as East China Sea. The leaders of both countries have difficult task to drive the bilateral relations positively for mutual benefit. This article demonstrates that while to some extent their differences are difficult to settle, they need to be put aside to build mutual trust as a basic ground for cooperation. Unfortunately, it seems that their relations in the future has still characterized, among others, by the absence of the will to understand each other.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document