Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 October 2009
A distinctive feature of the evolution of the modern international system has been the emergence of ideologies so universalist in their assumptions that they have ignored, or worse, denied the cultural and political diversities of mankind—diversities which constitute the ineluctable framework of international politics and which make the conduct of foreign affairs such a complex and difficult craft. One major obstacle, however, to understanding the problems which this development poses for the theory and practice of international relations is the fact that the correct usage of the term ‘ideology’ is very much broader than that which is generally accepted today.
1 Plamenatz, John, Ideology (London, 1970), p. 15.Google Scholar
2 Montesquieu, Baron de, trans. Thomas Nugent, The Spirit of the Laws (New York, 1949), p. 1.Google Scholar
3 Quoted by Kubalkova, V. and Cruickshank, A. A., ‘A double omission’, British Journal of International Studies, 3 (1977), p. 292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Auden, W. H., Collected Shorter Poems 1930–1944 (London, 1950), p. 191.Google Scholar
5 Quoted by Minogue, K. R., Nationalism (London, 1969), p. 41.Google Scholar
6 Quoted by Kedourie, E., Nationalism (London, 1960), p. 83.Google Scholar
7 Quoted by Kohn, Hans, Prelude to Nation-States: the French and German Experience 1789–1815 (New York and London, 1967), p. 235.Google Scholar