The transformative theory of the modern state system: Hobbesian project vs. Hegelian alternative

This dissertation presents the diachronic theory of international systemic transformations. It shows that two theoretical questions have to be answered affirmatively for the construction of a diachronic systems theory for international relations: (1) whether the concept of system can account for its structural changes endogenously and (2) whether, if it is possible, such a diachronic systems theory can provide causal explanations for the past and present international political phenomena and their historical conjunctions. To probe the first possibility, this dissertation critically examines the prevalent positivist conception of system in international relations and finds it both epistemologically suspicious and synchronic. Drawing from diverse post-positivist socio-philosophical sources—i.e., Bhaskarian transcendental realism, Giddensian structuration theory, Habermarsian communicative action, philosophy of language and Gadamerian hermeneutics—this dissertation proposes that a post-positivist systems theory purporting to explain its structural transformation be equipped with two independent ontological categories in addition to structure and agent: life-world and action-medium. As it is impossible to postulate any linguistic system without the existence of written or verbal signs that are shared by the community members, political system also presupposes such an action medium (or political signifier) which is constructed in a social context (life-world). Power in the Foucaudian sense is that particular kind of action medium in political system. Therefore, the constitutive relationship between various modes of power and the formations of agent and structure should be the integral part of a transformative political systems theory. Because these insights are best illustrated in Hegel\u27s Phenomenology of Spirit, particularly in the Hegelian concept of recognition, this dissertation presents Hegel as an alternative to the existing paradigms of International Relations. To answer the second question, this dissertation examines the heuristic value of the Hegelian diachronic theory of international relations in regard to the formation and evolvement of the modern states system, and shows that it is more parsimonious and comprehensive than the realist paradigm theory because the realist anomalies (nationalism, regimes, hegemony, colonialism and international laws, etc.) are explained within its own theoretical framework