Stephen D. Krasner. 1999. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy

Stephen D. Krasner. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), pp. 1-42.

Westphalian and international legal sovereignty are examples of organized hypocrisy. Imposition can only occur when interests are different and power asymmetries high. Coercion can take place if preferences of rulers are different and if there are asymmetries of power, but the asymmetries are less than for imposition. Conventions can only occur if rulers have complementary or identical interests. Contracts are like conventions, but contingent on cooperation.

Christian Reus-Smit. 1997. The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions

Christian Reus-Smit, “The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions,” International Organization 51, 4 (Autumn 1997), pp. 555-89.

Fundamental institutions are grounded in the underlying normative foundations of international society. Constitutional structures are ensembles of a shared belief about the moral purpose of centralized political organization, an organizing principle of sovereignty, and a norm of pure procedural justice.

States adopt different institutional practices because different norms define the cognitive horizons of institutional architects, thus shaping the institutional architecture, as well as the primary social values institutions are intended to embody.

The modern state principle that social rules should be authored by those subject to them gave rise to multilateral forms of rule determination and the precept that tules should be equally applicable to all subjects warranted the formal codification of contractual international law to ensure the universality and reciprocity of international regulations.

Hein Goemans. 2006. Bounded Communities: Territoriality, Territorial Attachment, and Conflict

Hein Goemans, “Bounded Communities: Territoriality, Territorial Attachment, and Conflict,” in Miles Kahler and Barbara Walter, eds., Territoriality and Conflict in an Era of Globalization (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 25-61.

Homeland is specified by territory rather than language, cultural, ethnic, or other ties. Such a definition allows coordination between the leaders and subjects of a homeland to facilitate a collective defense. The specification of a homeland relies on focal principles with wide applicability that are simple enough to be interpreted by all concerned. The focal principles chosen depend first on enforcement cost, a leader's self-interested motives, contingencies that may arise, and common knowledge such as historical information.

Homeland defined by focal principles should be indivisible. States should be willing to claim and fight for territory fitting its focal principles. Newly drawn boundaries should follow focal principles rather than military conquest.

Brian M. Downing. 1992. The Military Revolution and Political Change: Origins of Democracy and Autocracy in Early Modern Europe

Brian M. Downing. 1992. The Military Revolution and Political Change: Origins of Democracy and Autocracy in Early Modern Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Chapters 1 (“Introduction”), entire, and 10 (“Conclusions”), particularly pp. 239-242, 246-251.

Political

The representative assemblies of late medieval Europe constituted a basis for liberal democracy. A dangerous military situation precludes or destroys constitutionalism and fosters an authoritarian, military-bureaucratic state, especially when countries rely on domestic resources to finance modern armies.

William H. Riker. 1964. Federalism: Origin, Operation, Significance

William H. Riker. 1964. Federalism: Origin, Operation, Significance. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Chapter 2 (“The Origins and Purposes of Federalism”), particularly pp. 11-16.

The first condition of federalism is the willingness of politicians to bargain to expand territorial control. The second is the the acceptance of the bargain by rulers of constituent units in response to some external military-diplomatic threat or opportunity.

The circumstances that have resulted in federal rather than unitary constitutions can be characterized by a recognized need for military-diplomatic unity and an unwillingness or inability of national leaders to impose centralization by force.

Military and expansion conditions are necessary to the occurrence of federalism.

Stephen M. Walt. 1987. The Origins of Alliances

Stephen M. Walt. 1987. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Chapter 2 (“Explaining Alliance Formation”), particularly pp. 17-40.

Alliances can respond to a threat by either balancing or bandwagoning. Whether states choose to bandwagon or balance depends on the aggressive states' aggregate power, geographic proximity, offensive powers, and intentions. Stronger states should have more tendencies to balance. Greater probabilities of allied support increase tendencies to balance. Unalterably aggressive states should provoke balancing. Nations should bandwagon with likely war-time victors. Security considerations take precedence over ideological ones and ideologically based alliances are unlikely to survive when more pragmatic interests intrude.

David R. Mayhew. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection

David R. Mayhew. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press. Pp. 1-7, 13-19, 81-105.

Scrutiny of purposive behavior offers the best route to understanding the U.S. Congress. Congressmen are motivated by reelection. Allocation of goods to one congressman does not usually reduce the allocation of goods to another; as such, there is little incentive to reform the House or Senate. There is minimal party pressure. Incumbent congressmen care more about keeping their jobs than about party lines.