• 15 Pages
  • 3664 Words

Create a new account

It's simple, and free.

Robert Keohane and Robert Gilpin

be contrasted with 'pure economics," in which no actor has any control over the others," or with "a situation . . . in which noneconomic resources were used solely in pursuit of values that could not be exchanged on a market, such as status, or power itself. Such a situation would be 'pure politics.'"2 Keohane went on to add that "attempts to separate a sphere of real activity, called 'economics,' from another sphere of real activity, called 'politics,' are doomed to frustration and failure."3

Gilpin offered an interpretation of the term "international regime," which while broader, does not necessarily conflict with the views of Keohane. Gilpin stated that control "over or governance of the international system is a function of three factors."4 These three factors are, according to Gilpin, the distribution of power among political coalitions, the hierarchy of prestige among states, and the set of rights and rules that govern or at least influence interactions among states.5

Gilpin stated that control through the distribution of power has, throughout history, been characterized by: (1) hegemony or imperialism, in which a single powerful state "dominates the lesser states in the system;" (2) bipolarity, in which "two powerful states control . . . interactions within and between

4Robert Gilpin, War and change in World Politics (C


Page 1 of 15 Next >

More on Robert Keohane and Robert Gilpin...

APA     MLA     Chicago
Robert Keohane and Robert Gilpin. (2000, January 01). In Retrieved 16:37, October 25, 2014, from
Copyright © 1999 - 2014 All Rights Reserved. DMCA