Abstract:The “International Relations” (“IR”) discipline is going through a double-disciplinary crisis. Once again, there is a general feeling of increasingly fragmenting common ground within the discipline (the first crisis) and the acknowledgment that the “IR” only imports concepts and methods from other disciplines but does not export any (the second crisis). Both crises share the same origin. The subject matter – “international” – has not been rooted in any social ontology. The discipline is now searching for the social ontology of “international.” The most discussed candidate for such a role is “societal multiplicity”, a product of “uneven and combined development”. The article offers an alternative variant of the social ontology for “international,” which is based on Niklas Luhmann’s system theory and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s social theory. It argues that “international” is rooted in the segmentary systemic differentiation between inside and outside and in the struggle for recognition of these segments. The semantic marker for this ontology is “sovereignty.” In this way, “sovereignty” turns into a systemic program (in Luhmann’s terms) of international politics (as a subsystem of the world society political system), designating the common ground for the discipline and marking social processes and phenomena, which can be studied within the “IR”. This will allow the “International Relations” to export some of its concepts and methods to other social science disciplines. The article critically engages with the Theory of World Politics by Mathias Albert, reconstructing it to meet the challenge of the double-disciplinary crisis. The “balance of power” is criticized with the help of Michel Foucault, who showed: that among European powers in 19th-century Europe, the balance of power, responsible for producing international order, was linked with the police inside states, responsible for producing domestic order. Nevertheless, to keep the balance of power and to secure the domestic order, states and police used the same technique of observation – statistics, making the “balance of power” a non-autopoietic system program incapable of producing an autopoietic system of international relations. “Sovereignty” also spans both realms of the inside/outside divide but is observed mainly through external recognition and is rooted in the social ontology of “international.” The article argues that “sovereignty” is better suited for the system program of international politics than the “balance of power”.

Social Evolution of International Politics: from Mearsheimer to Jervis

The social evolution of international politics

Evolutionary Theorization of Peaceful International Changes

On Social Evolution

Toward Generalized Evolutionism: Beyond "generalized Darwinism" and Its Critics

The Evolution of Social Constructivism in Political Science: Past to Present

International Systems and Domestic Politics: Linking Complex Interactions with Empirical Models in International Relations

The evolutionary dynamics of social systems via reflexive transformation of external reality

A Theory of World Politics

Mearsheimer's World-Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security

International Systems and Domestic Politics: Linking Complex Theories with Empirical Models in International Relations

Evolutionary Theory in the Administrative Sciences: Introduction

America'S Military Interventionism: A Social Evolutionary Interpretation

The Standard of ‘Civilisation’, the Expansion Thesis and the 19th-century International Social Space

J.A. Schumpeter and T.B. Veblen on economic evolution: the dichotomy between statics and dynamics

Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology

Dynamics and Development of the International System: A Complexity Science Perspective

The social evolution of individual differences: Future directions for a comparative science of personality in social behavior

Grounding Ontology of the “International” in Terms of Radical Constructivism

The Other in European self-definition: an addendum to the literature on international society

Evolutionary Dynamics of Populations with Conflicting Interactions: Classification and Analytical Treatment Considering Asymmetry and Power