Query Result Set
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:909Hits:19872945Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

  Hide Options
Sort Order Items / Page
REVISIONIST CRITIQUE (2) answer(s).
 
SrlItem
1
ID:   131993


Assertive China narrative: why it is wrong and how so many still bought into it / Jerden, Bjorn   Journal Article
Jerden, Bjorn Journal Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Publication 2014.
Summary/Abstract Dissenting assaults on the conventional wisdom that China's foreign policy became more 'assertive' in 2009-2010 have intensified. In this article I develop this revisionist critique in three ways. First, to make the most valid and cumulative assessment of the accuracy of the 'assertive China narrative' to date, I conceptualise its key empirical claim as a case of the general phenomenon of 'foreign policy change'. Second, based on this framework, I present a range of new empirical evidence that, taken as a whole, strongly challenges the notion of a new Chinese assertiveness. Third, since academic China and Asia experts played a pivotal role in creating the narrative, I raise a comprehensive explanation of why a great many scholars so strikingly went along with the flawed idea.
        Export Export
2
ID:   151764


Evaluating the revisionist critique of just war theory / Lazar, Seth   Journal Article
Lazar, Seth Journal Article
0 Rating(s) & 0 Review(s)
Summary/Abstract Modern analytical just war theory starts with Michael Walzer's defense of key tenets of the laws of war in his Just and Unjust Wars. Walzer advocates noncombatant immunity, proportionality, and combatant equality: combatants in war must target only combatants; unintentional harms that they inflict on noncombatants must be proportionate to the military objective secured; and combatants who abide by these principles fight permissibly, regardless of their aims. In recent years, the revisionist school of just war theory, led by Jeff McMahan, has radically undermined Walzer's defense of these principles. This essay situates Walzer's and the revisionists’ arguments, before illustrating the disturbing vision of the morality of war that results from revisionist premises. It concludes by showing how broadly Walzerian conclusions can be defended using more reliable foundations.
Key Words Just War Theory  Laws of War  Revisionist Critique  Just  Unjust Wars 
        Export Export