Journal article
Rigour, gate keeping and security: A debate with Bellamy and McDonald
Australian Journal of Political Science, Vol.40(3), pp.419-423
2005
Abstract
I am pleased that Bellamy and McDonald have explained why they used an altered version of solidarism. Had they cited the post-1977 sources, rather than Hedley Bull's 1966 paper, in their article, my reaction would have been different. However, they have responded with further charges. Given space constraints, I respond to some, but not all, of their charges. This rejoinder is divided into five parts. The first defines the English School (ES), while the second discusses security in the ES. The third addresses the claim that I portrayed human security as a threat to the ES and the fourth examines the argument that I regard ES texts as sacred. The final part speculates about what we might learn from this debate.
Details
- Title
- Rigour, gate keeping and security: A debate with Bellamy and McDonald
- Authors/Creators
- S.M. Makinda (Author/Creator) - Murdoch University
- Publication Details
- Australian Journal of Political Science, Vol.40(3), pp.419-423
- Identifiers
- 991005541321107891
- Copyright
- © 2005 Australasian Political Studies Association
- Murdoch Affiliation
- School of Social Sciences and Humanities
- Language
- English
- Resource Type
- Journal article
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
Source: InCites
Metrics
26 Record Views
InCites Highlights
These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output
- Citation topics
- 6 Social Sciences
- 6.27 Political Science
- 6.27.50 International Relations
- Web Of Science research areas
- Political Science
- ESI research areas
- Social Sciences, general