Book Description

"The restricted approach to peace in theories of international relations (peace as the absence of war or state survival) is not conducive to the long-term alleviation of human suffering. This thesis uses the philosophy of ecology, with its holistic approach to "positive peace", as a means to critique the peace conceptions and prescriptions in the realist and liberal strands of IR theory. A review of ecological thought stresses the convergence of deep ecology and social ecology under a radical umbrella. Inspired from anarchist/naturalist philosophy, radical ecology seeks peace by defending an ethic of detachment and cooperation, a decentralized polis and economy, and a holistic epistemology: such prescriptions are shaped by a reading of nature emphasizing finiteness, wholeness, diversity, and long age. Realism is criticized for its ontology of conflict and aggression, its hierarchical view of nature, its elitist view of the polis, its endorsement of political and/or cultural homogeneity, and its materialism. Liberalism's emancipatory framework is likewise hampered by policies favoring homogeneity, materialism and "order"-through-technicity. In both cases, non-ecological (and peace-threatening) values are reinforced by positivism. The thesis concludes with a review of current challenges to IR theory, assessing their compatibility with ecological precepts. We argue that critiques from the WOMP, feminism, neomarxism, structurationism and postmodernism do play an important role in reconstructing the bases of a new "peace theory" in International Relations, but that an ecological approach can subsume such contributions under a distinctly coherent framework." --