Milner's piece "IPE: Beyond Hegemonic Stability" examines a number of explanatory factors and propositions behind states' actions within the International Political Economy. His section on "the power of values" offers the idea that the social construction of states' identities constrains the choices the states make and pushes them towards certain behaviors. This concept relates to one argument that I have visited in a few of my politics papers- the "Asian Values" argument. According to this argument, Asian
values promote “consensus, harmony, unity and community [as] the essence of
Asian culture and identity” which conflict with general Western values like “absence
of consensus, conflict, disunity, and individualism” (Hoon). The argument supports Milner's point that typical asian values are often integrated into
governmental decisions and rhetoric. The
conflict between Western and Asian values causes anti-western sentiments
within the region and are also
a basis for political and regional connections between Asian countries. Milner's Japan/Pacifism example is somewhat similar to the asian values argument, as both could be motivations for less integration into the international economy. However, this notion of nonmaterial influences may not be as significant, or can even stem from Milner's third point, the influence of domestic politics on the IPE.
Nice link, Lindsey. and you are right on several counts - Milner is indeed looking at the way norms and values can shape trade systems or regimes.
ReplyDeleteI also think you're right to ask whether "nonmaterial" influences derive from domestic political factors (or vice versa). The "nonmaterial" values we observe in international trade decisions by certain countries may in fact be based on very "rational" material interests of a people as expressed domestically to their government; and on the other hand, domestic politics and interest groups may have their understanding of what is in their "interest" shaped by norms and values other than materialism.