War and Change in World Politics (Volume 0)

I had to read this book for class. The sections on the decline of empire/hegemony are essential to understanding why the United States is doomed to fail. The author explains that the cost of maintaining empire eventually bankrupt the empire and a new hegemony replaces the old one. Although this can be done peacefully (collapse of USSR), the historical norm is total war between the hegemony/empire and the new challengers. The chances of U.S. citizens electing somebody like Ron Paul who will drastically scale back overseas forces and end preemtive wars is not good. More likely than not status quo politicians like Bush, Obama, Romney, etc will get elected and continue to maintain America's 900 military bases in 130 countries; start new wars and expand old ones; spend vast sums of money on expensive military research and projects. According to Gilpin's chapter on empire decline, this means that the U.S. will eventually bankrupt itself and there will be a change in the international system. Hopefully the change will be peaceful (U.S. voluntarily bringing forces home as Ron Paul advocates), and not violent (U.S. goes to war with China, Russia or another rising power that threatens U.S. hegemony).

nice product

Gilpin is surprisingly easy to read and interpret, this book is a great size to carry around for school. Great seller and very great shipping!

Outstanding

This classic book from the early 1980's was written by Robert Gilpin from the Realist school of international relations. Seeing nation states as actors trying to maximize their own power, the realist school looked at nation states as the rough equivalent of rational actors in a theoretical economic paradigm. At a theoretical level, this book is helpful for understanding inter-relationships between nation states and how changes which disrupt the balance of power between nation-states can create the potential for conflict and outright war. Written during the cold war, when nation-states were the primary actors in world affairs, it doesn't address the non-state actors and their role in international affairs and how they complicate what interests a nation-state seeks to maximize. Gilpin puts a great deal of emphasis on the role nation-states play in gaining and maintaining hegemony over other nation-states. Gilpin provides the classical balance of power analysis of the cold-war years and codifies the paradigm in a well ordered fashion. There has been alot of water under the bridge in foreign relations since Gilpin produced this monumental book. Despite it's limitations, much of his analysis is useful today.

For many years I have relied on War & Change in World Politics as a structural guide to examining international relations. Gilpin's classic work provides, both clear historical and theoretical support to augument his argument. His thoughts reside firmly in the realist tradition, but adds to the richness of that paradigm through focusing on transition. Gilpin correctly argued that,"Throughout history a principal objective of states has been the conquest of territory in order to advance economic, security, and other interests. Whether by means of imperialist subjugation of one people by another or by annexation of contiguous territory, states in all ages have sought to enlarge their control over territory and, by implication, their control over the international system. For this reason, a theory of international political change must of necessity also be a theory of imperialism and political integration.(23) The firm goal of Gilpin is to creat a theory of the transition of power relations. I believe that he has provided the initial steps through his courageous attempt to provide framework developing a theory of change. I first read War & Change while residing in Western and Central Europe, from 1989 to 1999. I was at the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, The Gulf War, and witnessed the collapse of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany. Gilpin's book provided structure to my studies and my personal search for understanding of the dynamics of these profound changes in societies. I evaluated theories of economism, based on American capitalism versus European and Japanese socialism and the belief in a new tri-polar order and found them theoretically broken down in War & Change. Gilpin argued that,"Although multipolar systems can become tripolar, the more usual occurrence is for bipolar systems to become tripolar, and as Waltz correctly observed, tripolar systems tend to be the most unstable os all....Thus the emergence of a powerful China, Japan, or united Europe would undoubtedly prove to be a destabilizing factor in contemporary world politics."(91) The explosion of the Internet changed for many the equation of power. However, the technological catch up tactics of Japan in the 1980s had many Americans worrying that it's comparative advantage was being lost. The Internet will decrease the curve and the trajectory of technological catchup policies. Take a read of pages 173-178 to fully appreciate Gilpin's analysis of pre-Internet military and technological trends. The ideas of democracy as the only legitimste form of government were dismayed by my real life experiences and I found support and faults in my analysis of this situation in Gilpin's work. In closing, I believe that Gilpin needed to concentrate his argument more on a particular structure of change. However, because of the wide range of issues that increase the factors of change and the trajectories of states an explanation of change that requires this drift was almost a necessity. For any student of international relations or history War & Change in World Politics is rich in references and advice for structuring an analysis. My belief is that this is a fundamental book in understanding the changes occurring now and that will be in the future.

Book was in good condition and it came quickly. It is boring but political science readings usually are.

Nice work. I used some of its insights in my own _Iraq 2003: Causes and Consequences of an Imperial Expedition_ (Editions Tour Blanche, 2007), and my _A History of the British Conquest of Afghanistan and Western India, 1838-49_ (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2009).

国際関係の名著だが、 ミクロ経済学の概念がないと、 読解は難航するだろう。

国際関係論においていわゆるリアリズムに属するとされるGilpinの代表作の一つです。 Waltzと並んで「ネオリアリズム」の代表格とされることもありますが、実際に読んで見ると、むしろWaltzとの違いを意識して読み比べるのがいいのではないかと思われます。その意味では、いわゆる覇権安定論との関係ばかりではなく、「伝統的リアリズム」との関係について、Waltzのそれに対する関係との比較で考えるながら読むというのも、一つの読み方かもしれません。 Gilpinの当時のもう一つの代表作であるThe Political Economy of International Relationsに比べて、（翻訳は出ていませんが）量的にも内容的にもとっつきやすいです。