Beyond Appeasement: Interpreting Interwar Peace Movements in World Politics (Paperback)Cecelia M. Lynch (author)
- We can order this
The interwar peace movements were, according to conventional interpretations, naive and ineffective. More seriously, the standard histories have also held that they severely weakened national efforts to resist Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. Cecelia Lynch provides a long-overdue reevaluation of these movements. Throughout the work she challenges these interpretations, particularly regarding the postwar understanding of Realism, which forms the basis of core assumptions in international relations theory.The Realist account labels support for interwar peace movements as idealist. It holds that this support-largely pacifist in Britain, largely isolationist in the United States-led to overreliance on the League of Nations, appeasement, and eventually the onset of global war. Through a careful examination of both the social history of the peace movements and the diplomatic history of the interwar era, Lynch uncovers the serious contradictions as well as the systematic limitations of Realist understanding and outlines the making of the structure of the world community that would emerge from the war.Lynch focuses on the construction of the United Nations as evidence that the conventional history is incomplete as well as misleading. She brings to light the role of social movements in the formation of the normative underpinnings of the U.N., thus requiring scholars to rethink their understanding of the repercussions of the interwar experience as well as the significance of social movements for international life.
Publisher: Cornell University Press
Number of pages: 256
Weight: 454 g
Dimensions: 229 x 152 x 15 mm
"Beyond Appeasement is an ambitious and original research product. In this book, Lynch reexamines the British and U.S. peace movements between the two world wars. Though primarily addressed to international relations scholars, this book should also interest social movement specialists."-- Jeffrey W. Knopf, Naval Postgraduate School * Mobilization *
"Cecelia Lynch has written a fascinating, important, and unique book. Congratulations to her for the courage, wisdom, and pertinacity with which she pursues a subject that clearly breaks out of disciplinary and theoretical straitjackets. Her approach is exactly what the present academy needs when our university departments are often as stifling as the false dichotomies that this book assails so well."-- Nigel Young, Colgate University
"Cecelia Lynch, focusing on the activities of British and US peace movements between 1918 and 1945, makes a brave and necessary attempt to overcome a disciplinary divide between twentieth-century social movements and international relations.... It is hoped that Lynch's book will stimulate further, more detailed research on the origins of the United Nations."-- James Hinton, University of Warwick * The International History Review *
"Lynch argues persuasively that much of international relations thinking misconstrues the meaning of 'Idealism' and, in so doing, perpetuates a rigid dichotomy between 'Realism' and 'Idealism' that no longer serves us well. She enriches our understanding of the many sources of human meaning and action in the international sphere, including the much neglected topic of religion. An important contribution."-- Jean Bethke Elshtain, The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Professor of Social and Political Ethics, The University of Chicago
"Lynch's book is full of interesting ideas and information and makes a challenging argument. Readers with an interest in this topic will enjoy chewing over it."-- Frank Myers, State University of New York at Stony Brook. British Politics Group Newsletter. Summer, 2000.
"This major historical study of Anglo-American peace movements also speaks to significant theoretical issues. Cecelia Lynch carefully documents an important case of 'social movements' helping to transform international norms. And by effectively challenging the foundational myth of a sharp realist-idealist dichotomy (and idealist responsibility for World War II), she raises new questions about the impact of dominant disciplinary narratives on our understandings of international relations."-- Jack Donnelly, Graduate School of International Studies, University of Denver
You may also be interested in...
Please sign in to write a review