Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 14:16, 13 February 2024

The contents of the Republican liberalism page were merged into Democratic peace theory on 26 September 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. International relations Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. History High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Technology This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military science, technology, and theory task force

	Democratic peace theory is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 9, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted December 27, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted June 2, 2006 Peer review Reviewed November 17, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted Current status: Former featured article candidate

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Joshua Keating (4 April 2014). "Please, Russia, Don't Vindicate Tom Friedman's Silly McDonald's Theory". Slate. Retrieved April 4, 2014.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

A Monumentally Horrific Sentence

About a week ago, I decided that the next time I found a sentence in a wikipedia article that seemed completely incoherant, yet not filled with scientific jargon, that I would take the time, look up every key word, diagram the whole thing out, and try and force my brain to comprehend what is being communicated. While reading this article, I found the following sentence: "Arguments based on normative constraints, he argues, are not consistent with the fact that democracies do go to war no less than other states, thus violating norms preventing war; for the same reason he refutes arguments based on the importance of public opinion. " and seeing how it made no sense to me, I decided it would be perfect. Two hours later, here are my results (chronological order from bottom to top):

(Fact That: Rate Democracies Go to War = Rate non-Democracies Go to War") (Inconsistant With) ( (Argument) based on (Constraints) (Deriving from) (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context) ) (AND) ( (Arguments) based on (Importance of) (Public Opinion) ) (Thus) ( (Failing to comply with) (Group Held Beliefs About How Members Should Behave in a Given Contexts) related to (Preventing War) )

( (Argument) based on (Constraints) (Deriving from) (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context) ) (Inconsistant with) (Fact That: Rate Democracies Go to War = Rate non-Democracies Go to War) (Thus) ( (Failing to comply with) (Group Held Beliefs About How Members Should Behave in a Given Contexts) related to (Preventing War) ) (Also) ( (Fact That: Rate Democracies Go to War = Rate non-Democracies Go to War") (Refutes) (Arguments) based on (Importance of) (Public Opinion) )

Violate = break or fail to comply with (a rule or formal agreement).

(Argument) based on (Constraints) (Related to) (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context) are not consistent with the fact that democracies do go to war no less than other states, thus violating norms preventing war; for the same reason he refutes arguments based on the importance of public opinion.

(Argument) based on (Constraints) (Establishing) (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context) he argues, are not consistent with the fact that democracies do go to war no less than other states, thus violating norms preventing war; for the same reason he refutes arguments based on the importance of public opinion.

(Argument) based on ( (Constraints) ((Derived from) (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context) OR (Something Usual, Typical, or Standard)) )

(Argument) based on ( (Constraints) ((Relating to) (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context) OR (Something Usual, Typical, or Standard)) )

(Argument) based on ( (Constraints) ((Establishing) (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context) OR (Something Usual, Typical, or Standard)) )

Normative = (Establishing, Relating to, or Deriving from) ((Something Usual, Typical, or Standard) OR (A Group Held Belief About How Members Should Behave in a Given Context))

(Argument) based on ( (Constraint) that is ((Derived from) something (Typical)) )

(Argument) based on ( (Constraint) that is ((Related to) something (Typical)) )

(Argument) based on ( (Constraint) that is ((Established by) something (Typical)) )

(Argument)--based-on--->( (Constraint)--that-is--->( (Established by/Related to/Derived from)--something--->(Usual/Typical/Standard) ) )

(Argument)---"based on"--->((Constraint)---"derived from"--->(Norm))

((Norm)---derive from it--->(Constraint))---basis for--->(Argument)

(arguments) based on (constraints) that are (related to/derived from) a (standard/norm)

arguments based on constraints that are (Establishing, Relating to, or Deriving from) a (standard or norm)

Normative = Establishing, Relating to, or Deriving from a standard or norm.

(Arguments based on normative constraints,) he argues, are not consistent with the fact that democracies do go to war no less than other states, thus violating norms preventing war; for the same reason he refutes arguments based on the importance of public opinion.

Answer to criticism

Democratic peace theory has been criticised for lacking a clear definition of “democracy”. This criticism was actually answered by Rudolph Rummel in 2005:

Q: Are not your findings a matter of definition?

A: I do provide an explicit definition in Chapter 3 of my Saving Lives. But not everyone is happy with this. The question of definition can be carried too far, however, and risks a kind of definitionalism that can stand in the way of theory and empirical research. First, there is certainly a core group of nations that one generally would be considered perverse for calling nondemocratic. For example, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc. One does not need to focus on precise definition. Point and clicking is sufficient. Perhaps this undoubted set of democracies would comprise 20 or 30 nations. Now, while democratic none of them have made war on each other. Now, extend this list by increments. Add say the United States, Greece, France, and others for which a small minority would say that their being liberal democracies is questioned. Has the any member of this enlarged group made war on each other? No. Now add to this list those for which there is a larger group of scholars who would say they are nondemocratic, such as Japan, Israel, and India. Still no wars between them. And so on. Obviously, we would eventually add supposed democracies that have engaged in war, such as Great Britain and the war of 1812 and Boar War, or Kaiser German in World War I. But the point is that we would still have a large, undoubted list of core democracies that have not made war on each other and that number of democracies would be of such a size that the lack of war between these core democracies would be significant.

This text is found under the sixth question here. While the author died last year it is good to know that his text is still available on the Net.

2015-12-31 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

Our World In Data interactive map

Are we able to make an interactive map like this on this page?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.5.195.209 (talk) 16:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

References

1. "Where in the world do people emit the most CO2?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 7 October 2019.

Citations are a mess

Can someone please change the citations so that they don't just cite "Author Year", but incorporate the full citation in easy editing mode? It's an extraordinary hassle to try to figure out what citations are already in the article when editing in easy mode. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose to merge Republican liberalism into Democratic peace theory. The Republican liberalism article is just a smaller, poorly written and poorly sourced version of Democratic peace theory. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

• Support. There is not much in Republican liberalism that is not already in Democratic peace theory. Agnerf (talk) 06:22, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support, it can probably be adapted into a section. FelipeFritschF (talk) 04:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Go for it! Daask (talk) 21:20, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 06:35, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

" are hesitant to engage in armed conflict with other identified democracies"

Or "other countries" in general? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:52, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

• C-Class politics articles
• Top-importance politics articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• C-Class International relations articles
• Top-importance International relations articles
• WikiProject International relations articles
• C-Class history articles
• High-importance history articles
• WikiProject History articles
• C-Class military history articles
• C-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
• Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
• Old requests for peer review
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press