Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:28:31.897Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Three Generations of Comparative Sociologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 March 2011

Saïd Amir Arjomand
Saïd Amir Arjomand*
Affiliation:
Stony Brook University [sarjoman@notes.cc.sunysb.edu].
Get access

Abstract

Surveying three generations of comparative sociologists, separated by abrupt discontinuities, the study reaches the conclusion that the original promise of comparative sociology set in motion a century ago remains largely unfulfilled. It will then be argued that the work of the third generation of comparative sociologists on civilizational analysis and multiple modernities can redeem the promise of comparative sociology by rectifying the neglect of developmental patterns in other civilizations and recovering the fundamental relevance of the periphery. The third generation is thus seeking to undo the erasure of the historical experience of a very sizeable portion of humankind from the foundation of social theory. This argument is illustrated by selective reference to the concept of the nation-state, and comparisons of civilizational processes and developmental patterns that stem from different religions and traditions and generate varieties of nationalism, alternative modernities and patterns of secularization.

Résumé

Passant en revue trois générations de sociologie comparative, l’auteur arrive à la conclusion que le programme formé il y a un siècle est encore loin d’être réalisé. Les travaux de la troisième génération, analyse des civilisations, modernités multiples, réparent cet oubli des processus de développement dans les civilisations autres qu’occidentales et retrouvent l’importance fondamentale de la périphérie. Ce faisant, ils s’emploient à réintroduire l’expérience historique d’une partie importante de l’humanité complètement mise à l’écart par la théorie sociologique depuis ses débuts. L’argument s’appuie sur un choix de références à des concepts tels que l’état-nation, à des comparaisons de processus de civilisation et de modèles de développement tirés de religions et de traditions diverses. Variétés des nationalismes, modernités alternatives et figures de sécularisation.

Zusammenfassung

Drei Generationen komparativ-arbeitender Soziologen haben das vor einem Jahrhundert aufgestellte Programm noch lange nicht ausgeschöpft. Durch die Arbeiten der dritten Generation – Studien über die ins Vergessen geratenen Entwicklungsprozesse nichtwestlicher Kulturen und die fundamentale Bedeutung der Peripherie – werden die Versäumnisse der komparativen Soziologie ausgeglichen, die seit ihrer Gründung den historischen Erfahrungsschatz eines Großteils der Menschheit ausgeschlossen hat. Belegt wird dies anhand einer Auswahl von Nationalstaaten und der Gegenüberstellung verschiedener Kulturprozesse und Entwicklungsmodelle, denen unterschiedlichen Religionen und Traditionen zu Grunde liegen und die zu einer weiten Palette von Nationalismen, alternativen Modernitäten und Säkularisationsformen geführt haben.

Keywords

Comparative SociologyCivilizational AnalysisMultiple ModernitiesNationalismSecularizationSociologie comparativeAnalyse de civilisationModernités multiplesNationalismeSécularisationKomparativ-arbeitender SoziologeZivilisationsanalyseAlternativen ModernitätenNationalismenSäkularisation
Type
Research Articles
Information
European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie , Volume 51 , Issue 3 , December 2010 , pp. 363 - 399
Copyright
Copyright © A.E.S. 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bibiography

Adams, Julia, Clemensand, Elisabeth S. and Orloff, Ann S., 2005. Social Theory, Modernity, and the Three Waves of Historical Sociology, in Adams, Julia, Clemensand, Elisabeth S. and Orloff, Ann S., eds., Remaking Modernity: Politics and Processes in Historical Sociology (Durham, Duke University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albrow, Martin, 1996. The Global Age. State and Society beyond Modernity, (Cambridge, The Polity Press).Google Scholar
Anderson, Benedict, 1983. Imagined Communities (London, Verso).Google Scholar
An-Na‵im, Abdollahi A., 2008. Islam and the Secular State (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Arjomand, Saïd A., 1985. “Religion, Political Order and Societal Change in Shi‵ite Iran”, Current Perspectives in Sociological Theory, 6, pp. 1-15.Google Scholar
Arjomand, Said A, 1988. The Turban for the Crown. The Islamic Revolution in Iran (New York, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Arjomand, Said A, 2004a. Rationalization, the Constitution of Meaning and Institutional Development, in Camic, Charles and Joas, Hans, eds., The Dialogical Turn. New Roles for Sociology in the Post-Disciplinary Age (Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield).Google Scholar
Arjomand, Said A, 2004b. “Islam, Political Change and Globalization”, Thesis Eleven, 76, pp. 8-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arjomand, Said A, 2004c. “Social Theory and the Changing World: Mass Democracy, Development, Modernization and Globalization”, International Sociology, 19 (3), pp. 321-353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arjomand, Said A., 2009. After Khomeini. Iran under his Successors (New York, Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arjomand, Saïd A. and Tiryakian, Edward A., 2004. “Introduction” to Rethinking Civilizational Analysis (London, Sage).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnason, Johann P., 2003. Civilizations in Dispute. Historical Questions and Theoretical Traditions (Leiden, Brill).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnason, Johann P., 2005. The Axial Age and its Interpreters: Reopening a Debate, in Arnason, Johann P, Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. and Wittrock, Bjoern, eds., Axial Civilizations and World History (Leiden, Brill).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnason, Johann P., 2006. “Marshall Hodgson’s Civilizational Analysis of Islam: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives”, Yearbook of the Sociology of Islam, 7, pp. 23-47.Google Scholar
Arnason, Johann P, Eisenstadt, Shmuel N. and Wittrock, Bjoern, eds., 2005. Axial Civilizations and World History (Leiden, Brill).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asad, Talal, 2003. Formations of the Secular. Christianity, Islam, modernity, (Stanford, Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
Beigel, Fernanda, 2010. Dependency Analysis: The Creation of New Social Theory in Latin America, in Patel, Sujata, ed., ISA Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions (London, Sage).Google Scholar
Bellah, Robert N. and Taylor, Charles, 2007-08. “What Holds Us Together: An Exchange”, Items and Issues, 6 (1-2), pp. 8-15.Google Scholar
Bhargava, Rajeev, 2007. The Distinctiveness of Indian Secularism, in Srinivasan, T.N., ed., The Future of Secularism (New Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Bhargava, Rajeev, ed., 2008. Politics and Ethics of the Indian Constitution (New Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre, 1992. Deux imperialismes de l’universel, in Fauré, Christine and Bishop, Tom, eds., L’Amérique des Français, (Paris, François Bourin).Google Scholar
Briceño-León, Roberto, 2010. The Five Dilemmas of Latin American Sociology, in Patel, Sujata, ed., ISA Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions (London, Sage).Google Scholar
Brunner, Otto, Conze, Werner, and Koselleck, Reinhart, 1984. Säkularisation, Säkularisierung in Brunner, Otto, Conze, Werner and Koselleck, ReinhartGeschichtliche Grundbegriffe, (Stuttgart, Klett-Cotta).Google Scholar
Callis, Helmut G., 1947. “The Sociology of International Relations”, American Sociological Review, 12 (3), pp. 323-34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardoso, Fernando E., 1970. “Teoria de la dependencia o análisiss de situaciones concretas de dependencia,” Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencia Politica, 1 (3) pp. 400-419.Google Scholar
Cardoso, Fernando E. and Faletto, Enzo, 1979 [1969]. Dependency and development in Latin America (Berkeley, University of California Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakrabarti, Dipesh, 2007 [2000]. Provincializing Europe. Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Chatterjee, Partha, 1993. The Nation and its Fragments. Colonial and Postcolonial Histories (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Cohn, Bernard S., 1987. An Anthropologist among the Historians and Other Essays, (Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Connell, Raewyn, 2007a. Southern Theory. The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in Social Science (Cambridge, Polity Press).Google Scholar
Connell, Raewyn, 2007b. “The Northern Theory of Globalization”, Sociological Theory, 25 (4), pp. 368-385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, William R., 1948. “International Relations and Sociology”, American Sociological Review, 13 (3), pp. 263-268.Google Scholar
de Souza, Peter R., 2008. Institutional Visions and Sociological Imaginations: The Debate on Panchayati Raj, in Bhargava, Rajeev, ed., Politics and Ethics of the Indian Constitution (New Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Diop, Momar C. 1993. “Introduction” to Diop, Momar C., ed., Senegal: Essays in Statecraft (Dakar, Codesria).Google Scholar
Duara, Prasenjit, 2001.“The Disourse of Civilization and Pan-Asianism”, Journal of World History, 12 (1), pp. 99-130.Google Scholar
Duara, Prasenjit, 2004. “The Discourse of Civilization and Decolonization”, Journal of World History, 15 (1), pp. 1-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumont, Louis, 1967. Homo Hierarchicus: Essai sur le système des castes (Paris, Gallimard).Google Scholar
Dumont, Louis and Pocock, David, 1957. “Introduction” to Contributions to India Sociology, 1.Google Scholar
Durkheim, Émile 1968 [1912]. Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse, le système totémique en Australie, 5eedition (Paris, PUF).Google Scholar
Durkheim, Émile, 1982 [1895]. The Rules of Sociological Method, Lukes, Steven, ed., translation by Halls, W. D. (New York, Free Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, Émile et Mauss, Marcel, 1969 [1913]. Note sur la notion de civilisation in Mauss Marcel, M., Œuvres Vol. 2, Representations collective et diversités des civilisations, Karady, Viktor, ed. (Paris, Minuit). (English translation by B. Nelson, “Note on the Notion of Civilization”, Social Research, 38.4 [1971], pp. 808–813).Google Scholar
Durkheim, émile, 2004. “Essai sur ‘l’art du gouverner’ le Sénégal,” in Diop, Momar C., ed., Gouverner le Sénégal (Paris, Karthala).Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Shmuel N., 1972. “Post-Traditional Societies and the Continuity and Reconstruction of Tradition” in Eisenstadt, Shmuel N., ed., Post-Traditional Societies, (New York, Norton).Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Shmuel N., ed., 1986. Origins and Diversity of Axial Age Civilizations, (Albany, State University of New York Press).Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Shmuel N, 2000.“Multiple Modernities”, Daedalus, 129 (1), pp. 1-29.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Shmuel N., 2003. Comparative Civilizations and Multiple Modernities, 2 vols. (Leiden, Brill).Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert, 1978. The Civilizing Process, translation Jephcott, E., (New York, Urizen Books).Google Scholar
Esmer, Yilmaz, 2002. “Is There an Islamic Civilization?”, Comparative Sociology (1), pp. 265-298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairbanks, John K., ed., 1957. Chinese Thought and Institutions (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Gellner, Ernest, 1983. Nations and Nationalism (Oxford, Blackwell).Google Scholar
Granet, Marcel, 1930 [1929]. Chinese Civilization (New York, A. A. Knopf).Google Scholar
Guha, Ranajit, 1982. “On Some Aspects of the Historiography of Colonial India”, Subaltern Studies, 1 pp. 1-7.Google Scholar
Guha, Ranajit, 1987. “Introduction” to Cohn, Bernard S., An Anthropologist among the Historians and Others Essays (Oxford, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Heesterman, Jan C., 1985. The Inner Conflict of Tradition: essays in Indian ritual, kingship, and society (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Heilbron, Johan, 1985. “Les métamorphoses du durkheimisme, 1920-1940”, Revue française de sociologie, 26, pp. 203-237.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, Eric J., 1992. Nations and Nationalism since 1780. Programme, Myth, Reality (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, Marshall G. S., 1974. The Venture of Islam (Chicago, University of Chicago press).Google Scholar
Hountondji, Paulin J., 2002. “Knowledge Appropriation in a Post-Colonial Context” in Odora Hoppers, Catherine A. ed., Indigenous Knowledge and the Integration of Knowledge Systems (Clarement, New Africa Books).Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P., 1996. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York, Simon & Schuster).Google Scholar
Ikegami, Eiko, 1995. The Taming of the Samurai: Honorific Individualism and the Making of Modern Japan (Harvard, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Jackson, Robert H., 1990. Quasi-States. Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Karady, Victor, 1983. The Durkheimians in Academe: A Reconsideration, in Besnard, Philippe, The Sociological Domain, the Durkheimians and the Founding of French Sociology (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Kaviraj, Sudipta, 2003. “A state of contradictions: Political Power in Modern India,” in Skinner, Quentin and Stråth, Bo, eds., States and citizens: history, theory, prospects (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Kaviraj, Sudipta, 2005a. “On the Enchantment of the State: Indian Thought on the Role of the State in the Narrative of Modernity”, Archives européennes de sociologie, 46 (2), pp. 263-296.Google Scholar
Kaviraj, Sudipta, 2005b. “An Outline of a Revisionist Theory of Modernity”, Archives européennes de sociologie, 46 (3), pp. 497-526.Google Scholar
Kedourie, Elie, 1966. Nationalism (London, Hutchinson).Google Scholar
Knight, Alan, 2001.“The Modern Mexican State: Theory and Practice”, in Centeno, Miguel A. and López-Alves, Fernando, eds., The Other Mirror. Grand Theory through the Lens of Latin America (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Koenig, Matthias, 2007. “Religion in the Public Sphere: A Comparative Analysis of German, Israeli, American and International Law”, Ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, (190), pp. 3-17.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 2000 [1975]. Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes, (Boulder, Lynne Riener).Google Scholar
Lockman, Zachary, 2004. Contending visions of the Middle East: the History and Politics of Orientalism (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lomnitz, Claudio, 2001. “Nationalism as a Practical Sysytem: Benedict Anderson’s Theory of Nationalism from the Vantage Point of Spanish America”, in Centeno, Miguel A., and López-Alves, Fernando, eds., The Other Mirror. Grand Theory through the Lens of Latin America (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Madan, T.N., 1995. Pathways. Approaches to the Study of Society in India (New Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Madan, T.N., 1997. Modern Myths, Locked Minds. Secularism and Fundamentalism in India (New Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Madan, T.N, 2001. “The Comparison of Civilizations: Louis Dumont on India and the West”, International Sociology, 16 (3), pp. 474-487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madan, T.N., 2005. “Religions of India. Plurality and Pluralism”, in Malek, Jamal and Reifeld, Helmut, eds., Religious Pluralism in South Asia and Europe (New York, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Madjid, Nurcholish, 1998. The Necessity of Renewing Islamic Thought and Reinvigorating Religious Understanding, in Kurzman, Charles, ed., Liberal Islam (Oxford, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Mahoney, James, 2003. Knowledge Accumulation in Comparative Historical Research: The Case of Democracy and Authoritarianism, in Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, 2003. Comparative Historical Analysis: Achievements and Agendas, in Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Mamdani, Mahmood, 1996. Citizen and Subject. Contempory Africa and the Legacy of late Colonialism (Princeton, Princeton university Press).Google Scholar
Marsh, Robert M., 1967. Comparative Sociology; a Codification of Cross-Societal Analysis (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World).Google Scholar
Marsh, Robert M, 2009. “Civilizational Diversity and Support for Traditional Values”, Comparative Sociology, (8), pp. 267-304.Google Scholar
Marashi, Afshin, 2010. “Imagining Hāfez: Rabindranath Tagore in Iran, 1932” Journal of Persianate Studies, 3 (1), pp. 46-77.Google Scholar
Mauss, Marcel, 1983. An Intellectual Self-Portrait, in Besnard, Philippe, The Sociological Domain, the Durkheimians and the Founding of French Sociology (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Mauss, Marcel, 2004. “Civilizational Forms” (Barthel-Bouchier, D., ed. & tr.), in Arjomand, Said and Tiryakian, Edward A., eds., Rethinking Civilizational Analysis (London, Sage).Google Scholar
Mehta, Pratap B., 2005. Secularism and the Identity Trap, in Hasan, Mushirul, ed., Will Secular India Survive? (Delhi, Imprint One).Google Scholar
Mehta, Pratap B., 2008. Reason, Tradition and Authority: Religion and the Indian State, in Ingrid Crepell, Ingrid and Hardin, Russell, eds., Toleration on Trial, (Lanham, Lexington Books).Google Scholar
Melleuish, Gregory, 2000. “The Clash of Civilizations: A Model of Historical Development?”, Thesis Eleven, (62), pp. 109-20.Google Scholar
Min, Brian and Wimmer, Andreas, 2007. Ethnicity and War in a World of Nation-states, in Anheier, Helmut and Isar, Raj, eds., Conflicts and Tensions (Los Angeles, Sage).Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy, 2003. “The Middle East in the Past and Future of Social Sciences”, University of California Global and International Archive (The Berkeley Electronic Press).Google Scholar
Moore, Barrington Jr., 1966. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World (Boston, Beacon Press).Google Scholar
Moret, Alexandre and Georges, Davy, 2003 [1923]. From Tribe to Empire: Social Organization among Primitives and in the Ancient East (London, Kegan Paul).Google Scholar
Myers, Brian R., 2010. The Cleanest Race. How North Koreans see themselves and Why it Matters (New York, Melville House).Google Scholar
Nandy, Ashis, 1980. At the Edge of Psychology (Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Nandy, Ashish, 1983. The Intimate Enemy, (Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Nandy, Ashish, 2007. Closing the Debate on Secularism, in Needham, Anuradha D. and Rajan, Rajeswari S., eds., Crisis of Secularism in India, (Durham, Duke University Press).Google Scholar
Nandy, A. et al. ., 1995. Creating a Nationality (Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Nelson, Benjamin, 1980. On the Roads to Modernity: Conscience, Science, and Civilizations: Selected Writings (Totowa, Bowman and Littlefield).Google Scholar
Nielsen, Donald A., 2001. “Rationalization, Transformations of Consciousness and Intercivilizational Encounters. Reflections on Benjamin Nelson’s Sociology of Civilizations”, International Sociology, 16 (3), pp. 406-420.Google Scholar
Oommen, T.K., 2008. “Disjunction between Field, Method and Concept: An Appraisal of M.N. Srinivas”, Sociological Bulletin, 57 (1), pp. 60-81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel, Sujata, 2010. “At Crossroads. Sociology in India” in Patel, Sujata, ed., ISA Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions (London, Sage).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paz, Octavio, 1961 [1950]. The Labyrinth of Solitude. Life and Thought in Mexico, translation Kemp, L. (New York, Grove Press).Google Scholar
Pletsch, Carl E., 1981. “The Three Worlds, or the Division of Social Scientific Labor, Circa 1950-1975” Comparative Studies in Society and History, 23 (4), pp. 565-590.Google Scholar
Redfield, R. 1955. “The Social Organization of Tradition”, The Far Eastern Quarterly, 15 (1), pp. 13-21.Google Scholar
Ross, Edward A., 1915. South of Panama (New York, The Century Co).Google Scholar
Rudolph, Suzanne H., 2005. “The Imperialism of Categories: Situating Knowledge in a Globalizing World” Perspectives on Politics, 3 (1) pp. 5-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, Stephens, Evelyn. H. and Stephens, John D., 1992. Capitalist Development and Democracy (Cambridge, Polity Press).Google Scholar
Rundell, John and Mennell, Stephen, eds., 1998. Classical Readings in Culture and Civilization (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
Rustow, Dankwart, 1970. The Political Impact of the West in Holt, P. M., Lambton, Ann K. S. and Lewis, Bernard, eds., The Cambridge History of Islam, Vol. 1 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Sartori, Andrew, 1998 “Robert Redfield’s Comparative Civilizations Project and the Political Imagination of Postwar America”, Positions, 6 (1), pp. 33-65.Google Scholar
Shils, Edward, 1982. The Constitution of Society (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Singer, Milton, 1955. “The Cultural Pattern of Indian Civilization”, The Far Eastern Quarterly, 15 (1), pp. 23-26.Google Scholar
Singer, Milton, 1972. When a Great Tradition Modernizes: An Anthropological Approach to Indian Civilization (New York, Praeger).Google Scholar
Singer, Milton, 1976. Robert Redfield’s Development of a Social Anthropology of Civilizations, in Murra, John., ed., American Anthropology. The Early Years, (St. Paul, West Publishing).Google Scholar
Skya, Walter A., 2009. Japan’s Holy War. The Ideology of Radical Shintō Ultranationalism, (Durham, Duke University Press).Google Scholar
Smith, Michael G., 1965. The Plural Society in the British West Indies (Berleley, The University of California Press).Google Scholar
Smith, Michael G., 1974. Corporations and Society (London, Duckworth).Google Scholar
Smith, Michael G., 1991. Pluralism and Social Stratification, in Ryan, S., ed., Social and Occupational Stratification in Contemporary Trinidad and Tobago, (St. Augustine, Trinidad: Institute of Social and Economic Research).Google Scholar
Srinivas, Mysore, 1966. Social Change in Modern India (Berkeley, The University of California Press).Google Scholar
Srinivas, Mysore, 1992. On Living in a Revolution and Other Essays (New Delhi, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles, 2007. A Secular Age (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Tilly, Charles, ed., 1975. The Formation of National States in Western Europe, (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Véliz, Claudio, 1994. The New World of the Gothic Fox: Culture and Economy in English and Spanish America (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar
Wallerstein, Immanuel, 1976. The Modern World-System (New York, The Academic Press).Google Scholar
Wallerstein, Immanuel, 1997. The Unintended Consequences of Cold War Area Studies” in Noam, Chomsky, ed., The Cold War and the University (New York: The New Press).Google Scholar
Weber, Max, 1978. Economy and Society, Roth, Guenther and Claus, Wittich, eds., (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar
Wimmer, Andreas, 1997. “Who Owns the State? Understanding Ethnic Conflict in Post-Colonial Societies”, Nations and Nationalism, 3.4, pp. 631-665.Google Scholar
Wolf, Eric R., 1967. “Understanding Civilizations: A Review Article”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 9 (4), pp. 446-465.Google Scholar
Wright, Arthur F., 1960. “The Study of Chinese Civilization”, Journal of the History of Ideas, 21 (2), pp. 233-255.Google Scholar
Wright Mills, Charles, 1948. “Discussion [of International Relations and Sociology]”, American Sociological Review, 13 (3), pp. 271-73.Google Scholar