Benjamin Banta

Rochester Institute of Technology, Political Science, Faculty Member

Followers

Following

Public Views

Andreas Umland

National University of "Kyiv-Mohyla Academy"

Armando Marques-Guedes

UNL - New University of Lisbon

Noe Cornago

University of the Basque Country, Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea

Eros Carvalho

Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul

George Lawson

The Australian National University

Mauro Grondona

University of Genova

Nicola Lupo

LUISS Guido Carli

Juraj Marušiak

Slovak Academy of Sciences

Paolo Carta

University of Trento

Miguel Gallegos

Universidad Nacional de Rosario

Interests

Uploads

Papers by Benjamin Banta

Integrative pluralism and security studies: The implications for International Relations theory

European Journal of International Security

The idea of integrative pluralism offers a promising path for the development of theory in intern... more The idea of integrative pluralism offers a promising path for the development of theory in international security and international relations. Instead of either trying to shoehorn all theorising into a single, limited paradigm or giving up entirely on theoretical progress, the integrative pluralist approach calls for bringing diverse approaches together. More precisely, integrative pluralism involves explaining specific phenomena by linking causal processes across multiple layers of reality, and then using the findings to inform broader theoretical constructs such as IR theory paradigms. Elements of the integrative pluralism approach are already visible in the work of mainstream scholars such as Snyder and Katzenstein, as well as of critical scholars such as Sjoberg and Hansen, but the field has tended to overlook these scholars’ efforts at theoretical integration. To more explicitly develop integrative pluralism for our field, this article first draws on critical realist philosophy...

International Cyberpolitics

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies

The earliest scholarly writing on “cyberpolitics” focused mainly on the domestic sphere, but it b... more The earliest scholarly writing on “cyberpolitics” focused mainly on the domestic sphere, but it became clear by the mid-2000s that the Internet-generated “cyberspace” was also having massive effects on the broader dynamics and patterns of international politics. A great deal of the early research on this phenomenon focused on the way cyberspace might empower nonstate actors of all varieties. In many respects that has been the case, but states have increasingly asserted their “cyberpower” in a variety of ways. Some scholars even predict a coming territorialization of what was initially viewed as a technology that fundamentally resisted the dictates of sovereign borders. Such disparate possibilities speak to the ambiguity surrounding the intersection of the international system and the political affordances generated by the Internet and related technologies. Does cyberpolitics challenge the international system as we know it—perhaps altering the very nature of war, sovereignty, and th...

Grasping neither war nor peace: the folly of cosmopolitan preventive war

Journal of Global Ethics, 2018

Some liberal-cosmopolitan theorists have sought to justify preventive war by proposing new instit... more Some liberal-cosmopolitan theorists have sought to justify preventive war by proposing new institutions meant to ensure the accurate evaluation of non-imminent threats, and also make any war against them proportionate. In the debate over these proposals there has been little consideration of the postwar conditions any preventive war will likely produce. This is a serious omission; many theorists emphasize the degree to which the ability to secure a just peace is crucial to whether a war is proportionate. This article begins to remedy this missing piece of the debate over what it calls 'cosmopolitan preventive war' (CPW). After reviewing the debate, it discusses preventive war in the context of theorizations of postwar justice, or jus post bellum. It then investigates CPW's ability to account for jus post bellum concerns through a counterfactual 2003 Iraq CPW. Showing that the proposed institutions do not do enough to account for the likely, and possibly immense, postwar harm wrought by preventive war, the article concludes with a negative evaluation of the CPW program and a brief statement on the ethics of preventive war in general.

Benjamin Banta

Related Authors

Uploads

Papers by Benjamin Banta

Log In