Bö zel, Tanja A.; Ge schewski, Johannes; Zü n, Michael
Book Pa — Published Ve sion
In oduc ion: The Libe al Sc ip a he Beginning o he
21s Cen u y
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Bö zel, Tanja A.; Ge schewski, Johannes; Zü n, Michael (2024) : In oduc ion: The
Libe al Sc ip a he Beginning o he 21s Cen u y, In: Bö zel, Tanja A. Ge schewski, Johannes Zü n,
Michael (Ed.): The Libe al Sc ip a he Beginning o he 21s Cen u y: Concep ions, Componen s,
and Tensions, ISBN 9780198924272, Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, Ox o d, pp. 1-22,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/oso/9780198924241.003.0001
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/311006
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
1
In oduc ion
The Libe al Sc ip a he Beginning o he 21s Cen u y
Tanja A. Bo¨ zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
1 In oduc ion
A ound he globe, libe al ideas and ins i u ions a e unde p essu e. Au ho i a ian
egimes claim supe io i y o hei de elopmen al models e e ing o hei seemingly
highe e iciency and e ec i eness in igh ing pandemics, educing social inequali y,
o con olling mig a ion. Likewise, populis s o a ious colo s a ack libe al eli es o
hei ailu e o add ess hese socie al challenges, accusing hem o mo al bank up cy.
Pos colonial c i ics e e o he implici complici y, i no he oo cause o colonial
s uc u es, a guing ha libe alism has se ed as jus i ica ion o iolence, exploi a-
ion, exclusion, and injus ice. C i icism is also oiced by suppo e s o libe alism.
They denounce he libe al hypoc isy o using double s anda ds, highligh ing he
bla an disc epancy be ween libe al p inciples and illibe al p ac ices, as showcased
by he bo de egimes o libe al democ acies. In a simila ein, p og essi e libe -
als deplo e he socie al i and ising inequali y p oduced by neolibe al policies.
Libe al ideas, ins i u ions and p ac ices a e con es ed bo h om wi hin and ou side
libe alism.
Con es a ions a e no hing new o libe alism. To he con a y, hey a e he essence
o libe al poli ics. Compe ing alues and unde s andings o wha is good, desi able,
and app op ia e o a socie y gi e ise o pe manen con es a ions wi hin libe alism.
Mo eo e , libe alism has always compe ed wi h al e na i e social models o ele-
ance and dominance. In ac , libe al ideas and ins i u ions ha e e ol ed h ough
disapp o al and esis ance, bo h om wi hin and ou side libe al socie ies. Ye , he
cu en con es a ions ha e a ained a new quali y. They con e ge in a polyphonic
c i icism o wha libe alism oday s ands o pu ing i on he de ensi e. Con empo-
a y libe al socie ies ace a loss o con idence in he abili y o hei co e ins i u ions
o p o ide solu ions o an a ay o challenges, which lie a he hea o p ominen
domes ic and in e na ional con lic s in he ea ly 21s cen u y. In some espec s, he
cu en si ua ion o libe al democ acies esembles he 1930s mo e han any o he
pe iod since hen, e.g., wi h ega d o he a ie ies o con es a ions. Ano he his o i-
cal e e ence poin is he la e 1960s when libe al democ acies we e con on ed wi h
Tanja A. Bo¨ zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n, In oduc ion. In: The Libe al Sc ip a he Beginning o he 21s
Cen u y. Edi ed by: Tanja A. Bo¨ zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n, Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. © Tanja A. Bo¨ zel,
Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n (2024). DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198924241.003.0001
2Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
a sense o sys emic ailu e, exp essed by c isis heo ies o m he le and he igh
(C ozie e al. 1975; O e 1972).
Con es a ions o libe al ideas and ins i u ions also shape in e na ional con lic s.
Pu in’s wa o agg ession agains Uk aine iola es undamen al p inciples o he
libe al in e na ional o de , including he so e eign equali y o s a es, e i o ial
in eg i y, and humani a ian s anda ds in wa a e. Russia denies Uk aine he igh
o collec i e sel -de e mina ion, and i s mili a y has engaged in massi e iola ions
o human igh s o Uk ainian ci izens. China, oge he wi h se e al coun ies o he
Global Sou h, e uses o join he sanc ions imposed by Wes e n libe al democ acies
on Russia, accusing he US and Eu ope o double s anda ds and ejec ing he Wes e n
hegemony in in e p e ing and applying in e na ional law (Saul 2022).
Analyses o hese con es a ions wi hin libe al democ acies and on he in e na ional
le el abound. Pos colonial c i iques o libe alism, he ise o BRICS and China, and
he g owing elec o al suppo o au ho i a ian populism ha e been in ensi ely s ud-
ied; each o hese ields has u ned in o an academic g ow h indus y. This edi ed
olume con ibu es o hese deba es bu akes a s ep back. I o e s a esh look a
hese di e en con es a ions by p o iding a be e unde s anding o hei common
a ge . To make sense o he cu en a acks agains libe al ideas and ins i u ions, we
in oduce he concep o “libe al sc ip .”
We de ine a sc ip as “sha ed unde s andings abou he o ganiza ion o socie y
ha a e exp essed in no ma i e s a emen s on how socie y ough o be (Sollen)” as
well as “empi ical s a emen s on how i is (Sein)” (Bo¨ zel and Zü n 2020). A sc ip is a
gene ic concep . I e e s o he unde lying no ma i e ideas abou he o ganiza ion o
socie y. The con empo a y a ie y o he libe al sc ip is cha ac e ized by some cen-
al and abs ac p inciples, such as sel -de e mina ion and equal mo al wo h, which
ansla e in o poli ical ( ule o law and democ acy), socie al ( ole ance and plu ali y),
economic (ma ke s and p ope y igh s), and c oss-cu ing (p og ess and openness)
componen s (see Zü n and Ge schewski 2021). These componen s a e e lec ed in
di e en subsc ip s, such as bo de s de ining who belongs o a socie y, o de s se ing
ules o collec i e decision-making, alloca ion e e ing o he dis ibu ion o goods
and li e chances wi hin socie y (including ealloca ion), and empo ali y speci ying
sha ed unde s andings o ime scales.
The libe al sc ip ea s speci ic ideas and ins i u ions such as eedom and a ma -
ke economy as pa s o a comp ehensi e model o o ganizing socie ies. None o
hese ideas and ins i u ions is necessa ily exclusi e o he libe al sc ip . Some s a es
ha a e conside ed as no libe al claim o be democ acies wi h ma ke economies,
seeking o educe social inequali y and sol e global p oblems by in e na ional col-
labo a ion. China, he so-called “sys emic i al” o libe al democ acies, is a case in
poin . The meaning o he libe al sc ip becomes dis inc i e by ela ing such concep s
o a no ma i e co e and linking hem h ough a pa icula g amma .
A sc ip s app oach enables a discussion o he no ma i e s eng hs o libe alism bu
also i s in e nal weaknesses, pa icula ly ela ed o he ensions wi hin and be ween
i s di e en subsc ip s and componen s. Socie ies ha e esol ed he ensions be ween
eedom and equali y o ma ke e iciency and social jus ice in di e en ways a
In oduc ion 3
di e en imes in his o y. This explains why he libe al sc ip comes in his o ical
and spa ial a ie ies. A he same ime, hese ensions a e he p ima y a ge o
con es a ions di ec ed agains libe alism.
To cha he libe al sc ip wi h i s componen s, he edi ed olume in eg a es heo-
e ical and me hodological pe spec i es om di e en disciplines, including poli ical
science, sociology, law, his o y, philosophy, pos colonial s udies, and educa ional
science. The di e se con ibu ions explo e he use ulness o “libe al sc ip ” in analyz-
ing, bu also p oblema izing libe alism and i s di e en componen s, hei linkages,
and he ensions hey p oduce. In demons a ing he heo e ical and empi ical added
alue o using “libe al sc ip ,” he olume p esen s a mul i ace ed and nuanced pic u e
o wha is a s ake in he c isis o libe alism a he beginning o he 21s cen u y.
This in oduc ion o he olume p oceeds in he ollowing s eps. We s a wi h a
discussion o he added alue o using “sc ip ” as a heu is ic and an analy ical concep
o e al e na i es, such as ideology, o de , p ac ices, o ins i u ions. We hen iden i y
ou cen al hemes ha s uc u e his olume. Fi s , we ask wha he libe al sc ip
ac ually is and how we can app oach i om di e en iewpoin s. Second, we inqui e
how he libe al sc ip a ies o e ime and space. Thi d, we dis inguish subsc ip s
and majo componen s o he libe al sc ip . Fou h, we iden i y ensions ha eme ge
wi hin he libe al sc ip and possible esolu ions. In each o he sec ions, we in oduce
indi idual con ibu ions and show how hey deal wi h and i in o he ou cen al
hemes.
2 Why Sc ip ?
In i s li e al meaning, a sc ip is no hing mo e han some hing w i en. In e e yday
language, a sc ip is used mos o en in he con ex o mo ies and hea e s e e ing o
he w i en documen ha de ails he dialogue and s ages di ec ions. In his sense, a
sc ip p o ides a s uc u e ha cons ains ac ion: sc ip ed ac ion is emo ely guided
ac ion. The social sciences ha e de eloped a a ie y o app oaches o speci y his
unde s anding o a sc ip a di e en le els o analysis. One may dis inguish be ween
he mic o-, meso-, and mac o-le el o using he concep (see also Bo¨ zel and Zü n
2020).
A he mic o-le el, Schank and Abelson (1977) de ine sc ip s as s e eo ypical
knowledge s uc u es ha allow us o unde s and and ac app op ia ely in a amilia
si ua ion, some imes e e ed o as “schemes” o “ ames” (Mandle 1984). In psy-
chology, sc ip s enable indi iduals o “handle s ylized e e yday si ua ions” (Schank
and Abelson 1977, p. 41). O en, hey comp ise no only a one- ime eac ion bu e e
o a sequence o ac ions. A sc ip is a empo ally o de ed, sequen ial ac ion s e eo ype.
In a simila ein, o ganiza ional sociology has de ined sc ip as a “schema ic knowl-
edge s uc u e held in memo y ha speci ies beha io o e en sequences ha a e
app op ia e o speci ic si ua ions” (Gioia and Poole 1984, p. 449). Bo h he sequen-
ial ac ion s e eo ype and he schema ic knowledge s uc u e highligh ha sc ip s
con ain a se o di e en s a emen s ha s and in a gi en ela ionship o each o he .
4Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
Bo owing om sociological ole heo y (Go man 1956; Mead 1934), he concep
accoun s o ac ions on he indi idual le el. Indi iduals ead and in e nalize sc ip s
ha guide hei ac ions.
A he meso-le el, sc ip s guide and cons i u e o ganiza ions and g oups. Ma ke -
ing, managemen , and o ganiza ional s udies, o ins ance, ha e ocused on pa icula
ac ion s e eo ypes. Sc ip s p o ide beha io al guidelines, explica ing how o di e -
si y p oduc s, how en e p ises should g ow, how employees should be ained, o
wha mindse s a e needed when s a ing new en u es (Haley and Haley 2016; Ha -
is e al. 2003; Lo d and Ke nan 1987). Cul u al s udies ha e a loose , less igid, and
less speci ied unde s anding o sc ip s. They ocus mo e on he cons uc ion o dom-
inan na a i es as o ien a ions o social g oups. P ominen examples conce n he
cons uc ion o ace o gende (Jackson 2006) o “blackness” (God eau 2015), lea -
ing mo e oom o he in e p e a ion o wha a sc ip en ails as well as o ac o s’
imp o isa ion.
One o he mos p ominen applica ions o sc ip a he mac o-le el has been
de eloped by he so-called S an o d School in i s esea ch on wo ld socie y (Boli
and Thomas 1999; Meye e al. 1997). John Meye and his collabo a o s a gue ha
he e is a “Wes e n Sc ip ,” which consis s o dominan cul u al sys ems and p ac ices
o o ganizing socie y. I is de ined as
cul u e o wo ld socie y, comp ising no ms and knowledge sha ed ac oss s a e
bounda ies, oo ed in nine een h-cen u y Wes e n cul u e bu since globalized,
p omo ed by non-go e nmen al as well as o -p o i co po a ions, in ima ely ied
o he a ionaliza ions o ins i u ions, enac ed on pa icula occasions ha gene -
a e global awa eness, ca ied by in as uc u e o wo ld socie y, spu ed by ma ke
o ces, d i en by ension and con adic ion, and exp essed in he mul i ude ways
pa icula g oups ela e o uni e sal ideas. (Lechne and Boli 2005, p. 6)
The unde s anding o sc ip s in his olume is also loca ed on he mac o-le el.
Unlike he S an o d School, howe e , we adop a gene ic concep ha we dissoci-
a e om he speci ic con en o a gi en sc ip . Acco ding o he S an o d School,
he e is one Wes e n Sc ip ha s uc u es wo ld socie y. Compe i o s a e miss-
ing. Beha io al de ia ions om he sc ip a e conside ed as decoupling a he han
he ollowing o an al e na i e sc ip . Agains his backg ound, we de ine sc ip as
sha ed unde s andings abou he o ganiza ion o socie y, exp essed in p esc ip i e
and desc ip i e s a emen s on how a socie y ough o be (sollen) and how i is (sein).
These s a emen s a e linked by a g amma ha in eg a es hem in o a cohe en se .
A sc ip also con ains ac ion epe oi es o how o a i e om sein o sollen, and
ice e sa.
Sc ip is a mul i ace ed concep ha con ains ea u es ha a e o pa icula in e -
es o us. Fi s , i b ings oge he no ma i e, cogni i e, and beha io al dimensions.
Second, i can wo k on he le el o socie y as a whole so ha i helps iden i y a knowl-
edge s uc u e abou how socie y is o ganized and how i should be o ganized, also
e lec ing on he ela ionship be ween hese wo dimensions. Thi d, sc ip s a e in a
In oduc ion 5
pe manen con es wi h each o he . They can change and adap o speci ic ci cum-
s ances o succeed in he compe i ion, lea ing su icien analy ical oom o acing
de elopmen s o e ime and space. Fou h, sc ip s speak o he mos undamen al
ques ions o o ganizing socie y: how a socie y de ines i s legi ima e o de , how i
d aws bounda ies including and excluding membe s, how a socie y ( e)alloca es i s
esou ces, and wha unde s andings o empo ali ies i elies upon. Thus, he con-
cep o sc ip comes wi h a s uc u e. I can be b oken down in o subsc ip s abou
bo de s, o de s, ( e)alloca ion and empo ali ies (Bo¨ zel and Zü n 2020).
A sc ip is ecu en o e ime; i is sha ed by signi ican g oups o become pa
o he public discou se; i compe es wi h o he sc ip s abou he app op ia eness o
poli ies, poli ics, and policies; and a sc ip jus i ies poli ical a angemen s, poli ical
p ocesses, and poli ical p og ams. To he ex en ha a sc ip becomes dominan ,
i ge s ma e ialized in social p ac ices (Al husse 2014). Howe e , sc ip needs o
be kep analy ically sepa a e om p ac ice. Di e en sc ip s exis in pa allel, while
g eed and o he sel ish mo i a ions may be e lec ed in p ac ices. Ou unde s and-
ing o sc ip hus upholds he dis inc ion be ween ideas and ac ion, also o cap u e
he social dynamics ha can a ise om gaps be ween he wo. A he same ime, sc ip
as a concep is mean o be analy ically desc ip i e, e en i we e e o i s no ma i e
elemen s. This makes i a gene ic concep which can desc ibe a libe al and a ascis
sc ip , i espec i e o ou own no ma i i y.
Sc ip ela es o se e al i aling concep s in he social sciences. P ac ices,ins i u-
ions,o de s, and ideologies equally e e o a se o no ms and injunc ions o social
p ocesses; hey a e all abou socie al s uc u es ha guide ac ion o ac o s on di -
e en le els. A he same ime, he e a e some majo di e ences ha gi e sc ip a
compa a i e ad an age when s udying he o ganiza ion o socie y (see also Zü n and
Ge schewski 2021).
To begin wi h, nei he ins i u ions no p ac ices cap u e he mac o-le el o soci-
e ies. P ac ices emphasize an ac ion-cen e ed mic o- o meso-pe spec i e, highligh -
ing ins an ia ions o pa e ned ac ions o indi iduals and o ganiza ions (Reckwi z
2002; Scha zki 2001). As such, p ac ices can be seen as “socially meaning ul pa -
e ns o ac ion which, in being pe o med mo e o less compe en ly, simul aneously
embody, ac ou , o ei y backg ound knowledge in and on he ma e ial wo ld” (Adle
and Poulio 2011, p. 6).
P ac ices a e “much mo e closely ied o indi iduals han a e o de s and o de -
es ablishing phenomena o much mac o social hough ” (Scha zki 2001, p. 5). P ac-
ices gain hei dis inc i e ake, speci ically by emphasizing ha hey “ne e possess
he sui gene is exis ence and nea omnipo ence some imes a ibu ed o s uc u al
and holis phenomena” (ibid., p. 5). This is he c i icism o he mac o-sys emic na u e
o a concep o “sc ip ” as an o de -ins i u ing en i y ha mo i a es p ac ice heo y.
While p ac ice heo y s a s wi h pa e ned ac i i ies, ins i u ionalis heo ies ocus
on cons ain s on hese ac i i ies. Ins i u ions embody “ he ules o he game” and
“ he humanly de ised cons ain s ha shape human in e ac ion,” as he amous
de ini ion o Douglass No h pos ula es (No h 1990, p. 3). Ins i u ionalis s sha e an
in e es in (mos ly o mal) “ ules, compliance p ocedu es, and s anda d ope a ing
6Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
p ac ices ha s uc u e he ela ionship be ween indi iduals” (Hall 1986, p. 19). Ins i-
u ions only de elop independen explana o y “bi e” (Capoccia 2016) o a “dis o ing
e ec ” (Imme gu 2006, p. 240) when hey become mo e han me e epiphenomenal
in e media ies be ween ac o s’ s a egies and he agg ega ion o hei p e e ences o
mac o-ou comes. I is sa e o say ha ins i u ions ope a e on a meso-le el. This also
applies o a mo e sociological unde s anding o ins i u ions as no only cons ain-
ing he beha io o ac o s bu cons i u ing hei in e es s and iden i ies (Ma ch and
Olsen 1989).
O de is a e m ha social scien is s o en use o desc ibe he in e play o ins i-
u ions on he mac o-le el. The global o de consis s o di e en ins i u ions and
p ac ices (Hu ell 2007). A cons i u ional o de is one in which ounda ional and
limi a ional ins i u ions in e ac wi h each o he (K isch 2010). O de —as much as
sc ip — hus wo ks on he mac o-le el. The no ion o o de , howe e , includes an
elemen o dominance. An exis ing o de p e ails o e imagina ions o al e na i e
o de s. A any gi en ime and social space, he e can be only one o de —o none,
e.g., in he case o ci il wa s. While he e may be s uggles abou he igh o de ,
only one is p esen acco ding o he logic o he concep . You may aim o a socialis
o de while li ing in a capi alis wo ld, bu he socialis o de is no p esen in his
case. Since he concep o o de includes an elemen o dominance, p oponen s o
he o de concep o en alk abou a hyb id o de o desc ibe si ua ions in which di -
e en ideas abou he igh o de no only compe e bu also use. Di e en sc ip s,
in con as , may and a e expec ed o compe e wi h each o he a he same ime in
he same social space. A sc ip does no need o be dominan o exis . Sc ip s a e
“imagined o de s.” Mo eo e , i is possible o desc ibe a me ely ac ual o de wi hou
cap u ing he meaning o i s unde lying no ms and ules. Fo ins ance, an ex a e -
es ial pe son may desc ibe an Ame ican oo ball game as an o de in which people
al e na e be ween a mo emen o con ac ion and expansion (K a ochwil 1989). In
con as , i is impossible o desc ibe a sc ip wi hou unde s anding he meaning o
i s no ms and ules.
Ideology, inally, also co e s mac o-s uc u al ea u es, ocusing mos ly on explain-
ing, ep essing, in eg a ing, mo i a ing, o legi ima ing he powe posi ion o social
classes, he people, o any o he social g oup ac ing ou o a si ua ion o dominance
and subo dina ion. Ideologies p o ide cohesion o social g oups and o en wo k
wi h he o ical means and dis o ions o eali y. While we acknowledge his unde -
s anding o ideology, we a o a di e en one, which ollows he ecen app oach o
he s udy o poli ical ideologies by Michael F eeden. I does no in oke he adi-
ional and o en pejo a i e unde s anding o ideology as losing ouch wi h eali y
o blu ing eal-wo ld expe iences in o de o jus i y he (excessi e) use o poli -
ical powe , bu sees i as he ubiqui ous and ine i able s udy o poli ical hinking
mo e gene ally. F eeden de ines poli ical ideologies as condensed and seman ically
ozen asso men s o conca ena ed concep s ha s uc u e poli ical hinking and
ha gene ally se e jus i ica o y pu poses (F eeden 1996; 2003; 2006; see also Mülle
2011, p. 92). We sha e wi h his unde s anding o poli ical ideologies, i s explici
In oduc ion 7
openness o compa a i e esea ch and i s dedica ion o ideological mo phology,
i.e., he ela ionship be ween di e en elemen s (F eeden 1994). While some
ideologies—like communism—ha e o mula ed a de ailed ac ion p og am, usually
uling ou any de ia ions om a p ese o hodoxy, o he s—like na ionalism— end
o a oid pa icula e e ence o conc e e ac o s and ac ions, allowing o mo e
in e nal a ia ions. Ideologies a e, he e o e, also open o a ie ies ac oss space
and ime.
Signi ican simila i ies no wi hs anding, we p e e o use he concep o sc ip s o
h ee easons. Fi s , he adi ional concep o ideology is s ill mo e p e alen (c .
Ge ing 1997). Ideologies a e o en oo abs ac and ague, “some hing concoc ed
by spinne s o d eams, o he wo ldly in ellec uals, o machina o s o o ali a ian
design” (F eeden 2006, p. 4). In mode n poli ical hough , he s udy o o ali a -
ian egimes pa icula ly con ibu ed o he nega i e image o poli ical ideologies
(A end 1966; F ied ich and B zezinski 1956). Due o i s pejo a i e no ma i e bal-
las , ideology is o en used as a polemic Kamp beg i (ba le e m). Second, he
concep o sc ip emphasizes i s epis emological unde pinnings. Mos desc ip ions
o ideologies o e look his dimension in he o ganiza ion o socie y. Sc ip s ha e
an inbuil seman ic ha poin s o pa icula ac ion epe oi es o becoming knowl-
edgeable. Thi d, ou concep o sc ip p o ides a heu is ic ool ha allows ui ul
compa isons as i con ains implici o explici s a emen s abou subsc ip s— he
bo de s, he o de , he ealloca ion o goods, and he insc ibed empo ali y o a
socie y.
3 Cap u ing he Libe al Sc ip (s)
Ou endea o aims o be e g asp he libe al sc ip as he common a ge o cu en
con es a ions o libe al ideas and ins i u ions. De ining and dis inguishing he con-
cep o sc ip is only he i s s ep. Iden i ying he “libe al” in he libe al sc ip is e en
mo e challenging. Pa I o his olume con ains h ee app oaches o cha ing he lib-
e al sc ip . Sec ion 3.1 below discusses how he con ibu ions o his olume ake up
he me hodological challenge. A ela ed ques ion conce ns a ia ion. Does i make
sense o e e o one libe al sc ip , o is i mo e app op ia e o speak abou libe al
sc ip s in he plu al? Is he e a common co e o only a ia ions? We discuss his
issue in sec ion 3.2 o his in oduc ion. A sc ip con ains chap e s and pa ag aphs;
i is hus composed o di e en elemen s and subsc ip s. Pa s II and III o his ol-
ume a e dedica ed o hem. These con ibu ions e ain om cap u ing he libe al
sc ip in an encompassing way bu iden i y key issues and componen s. Sec ion 3.3
will in oduce hese poin s and will ou line how hey a e add essed in his book.
Las ly, he di e en componen s o he libe al sc ip o en s and in a ela ionship o
ension. Di e en ways in which hese ensions a e esol ed gi e ise o di e en a i-
e ies o he libe al sc ip . Pa IV o he book will deal wi h hese ques ions ha we
summa ize in sec ion 3.4.
8Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
3.1 How o App oach he Libe al Sc ip ?
How can we g asp he libe al sc ip in me hodological e ms, gi en i s eno mous
a ia ion in ime and space? Duncan Bell (2014, p. 683) iden i ies h ee me hod-
ological app oaches o delimi cons i u i e cha ac e is ics o he libe al sc ip (see
also Zü n and Ge schewski 2021). Fi s , a philosophical app oach aims a unco -
e ing he inne a chi ec u e o libe al hinking and i s jus i ica ions, dis inguishing
di e en componen s and hei ela ionship o each o he . Such in e p e a ions come
usually in he o m o a a ional econs uc ion e ining libe al hinking in no ma i e
e ms (see Habe mas 1998; Rawls 1979). Such a ional econs uc ions unde empha-
size a ia ions in space and ime and end o neglec he da k sides o libe alism in
p ac ice.
Second, a his o ical app oach looks a he genealogy o libe al ideas o e ime and
space. I o en comes in he o m o canonical app oaches ha dis ill libe alism om
exempla y w i ings by hinke s conside ed libe al, including John Locke, Immanuel
Kan , and John S ua Mill. The selec ion o canonical w i e s begs he ques ion
o how ep esen a i e hey a e o libe al hinking in a pa icula place a a pa ic-
ula ime. Mo eo e , i seems o neglec he global en anglemen s o libe al hinking
(Con ad 2016; Sachsenmaie 2018).
The libe al sc ip consis s o a complex se o p esc ip i e and desc ip i e s a e-
men s ha a y o e ime and space. In o de o escape an essen ialis de ini ion, a
sociological app oach seems mo e app op ia e. I ocuses on wha libe als and illibe -
als hink, say, o do. In his iew, “ he libe al adi ion is cons i u ed by he sum o he
a gumen s ha ha e been classi ied as libe al, and ecognized as such by o he sel -
p oclaimed libe als, ac oss ime and space” (Bell 2014, p. 686). Such a sociological
app oach is su icien ly ocused o cap u e co e cha ac e is ics o he libe al sc ip ha
emain cons an o e ime and space while being open enough o ecognize ensions
and con adic ions be ween hem. I also allows o cap u ing empo al and spa ial
a ie ies o he libe al sc ip . The challenge o such a social cons uc i is econs uc-
ion is ha i libe alism is wha ac o s make o i , libe alism can a ain a meaning ha
sel -p oclaimed libe als ejec . Fo ins ance, illibe als o an i-libe als like o equa e
libe alism wi h communism o ascism, seeking o denig a e libe alism o sub e i s
meaning. The e needs o be a h eshold o including libe al s a emen s. Simila o
he o he wo app oaches, he sociological app oach has o be selec i e conce ning
whose s a emen s abou he libe al a e included in he econs uc ion o he libe al
sc ip . S ill, he libe al sc ip is wha libe als and illibe als make o i .
The h ee con ibu ions in Pa I o his olume ad ance di e en e sions o he
sociological app oach o how o cap u e he libe al sc ip . Zü n and Ge schewski
de elop a sociological econs uc ion o he con empo a y libe al sc ip . They ocus
on wha hose who a e mo e o less consensually conside ed libe als by o he s
desc ibe as libe al. I one ocuses on acknowledged con empo a y libe al speake s in
de e mining he libe al sc ip , hen—like any ele an social sc ip o signi icance—
i may also con ain no ma i ely ep ehensible elemen s, a leas in ce ain imes and
egions. The e we e, o example, ecognized libe als in he Uni ed Kingdom who
In oduc ion 15
in libe al socie ies. One o he implica ions is ha e o s and achie emen s should
be decoupled om economic ewa ds.
The analysis o subsc ip s and componen s b ings dep h o ou a emp o cap-
u e he libe al sc ip . Mo eo e , he discussion shows ha subsc ip s bea ce ain
ensions as he case o bo de s exempli ies. These ensions o en p o ide he a ge o
con es a ions abou how o esol e hem. Simila ly, each o he componen s may lead
o ensions and inconsis encies wi h o he p inciples o he sc ip when pu in o p ac-
ice, as he discussion o me i has shown. Al e na i ely, di e en e sions o esol ing
he ensions may lead o di e en a ie ies o , o e en al e na i e o he libe al sc ip
as in he case o woman’s igh s. Finally, his o ical and echnological changes as in
he case o publici y equi e eadjus men s ha c ea e new ensions and po en ial o
con es a ions. O e all, e en i he g amma o he libe al sc ip in eg a es di e en
subsc ip s and componen s in o a cohe en whole, he ensions wi hin and be ween
hem a e likely o become con es ed he momen hey a e u ned in o p ac ices in
changing ci cums ances.
3.4 Tensions and Con es a ions
A c ucial ea u e o he libe al sc ip is ensions be ween di e en componen s. In
his iew, a ie ies o he libe al sc ip a ise om he di e en ways o handling
ensions a he han because o di e en se s o componen s. Pa IV o he book
examines ensions inhe en o he libe al sc ip , p oduced by in e nal inconsis en-
cies, con adic ions, issu es, cons uc ion e o s o in-buil s uc u es o powe and
domina ion. Tensions a e concei ed as di e en om a mechanis ic (non-Hegelian)
unde s anding o con adic ions (Zü n and Ge schewski 2024, his olume). While
a ze o-sum logic akes e ec in he case o mechanis ic con adic ions, and one side
can ul ima ely p e ail, ensions can be p oduc i ely educed only by conside ing bo h
aspec s. In he case o ensions—and his is c ucial—a unila e al esolu ion is no
possible wi hou calling he whole in o ques ion. A legal absolu iza ion o nega i e
eedom igh s is jus as incompa ible wi h he concep o he libe al sc ip as unde -
mining indi idual undamen al igh s h ough majo i y decisions. While he ocus
on ensions di e s om con es a ions, i can help unde s and con es a ions o he
libe al sc ip as hey end o a ge ensions.
Axe, Rupp ech , and T inkle deal wi h he ension be ween collec i e egula ion
and libe al ma ke economy p inciples, pu ing in o ques ion he widely held belie
ha he la e o igina ed only in he Wes and we e simply ans e ed o he Eas
a e he end o he Cold Wa . They in oduce he e m “pe iphe al libe alism” o a
ange o ideas on a ma ke - and indi idual igh s-based ans o ma ion ha eme ged
in Eas e n Eu ope, he So ie Union, and Eas Asia long be o e 1989. In esponse o
he b oken p omise o “ac ually exis ing socialism” o deli e socioeconomic de el-
opmen , some economis s and social scien is s ad oca ed he alloca ion o goods by
ma ke s a he han by cen al planning and emphasized indi idual esponsibili y
and labo discipline o e collec i e igh s. The chap e a gues ha hese p inciples
16 Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
o pe iphe al libe alism pa ed he way o economic e o ms and poli ical change
in socialis and pos socialis coun ies. Such local in ellec ual adi ions and domes-
ic powe play we e e en ually mo e in luen ial han Wes e n ad iso y and poli ical
p essu e, al hough he la e ha e become a majo a ge o cu en con es a ions o
he libe al sc ip especially in Eas e n Eu ope.
Menzel ackles he epis emological ounda ion o he libe al sc ip analyzing he
ension be ween he idea and p ac ice o a ionali y and he unde lying bu o en
unacknowledged no ma i i y and posi ionali y o he libe al sc ip . She s a s by
explo ing he ension in Max Webe ’s wo k on objec i i y in he social sciences, which
has in o med libe al epis emology. Recognizing ha knowledge is con ex -bound,
Webe insis ed ha knowledge claims had o be objec i e and in e subjec i ely
alid. D awing on examples o peacebuilding and de elopmen coope a ion o he
Global Sou h, he chap e mo es on o expose unacknowledged commi men s and
poli ical agendas in allegedly objec i e knowledge p oduc ion and a ional policy-
making. P o essionals de ise and implemen policies and p ojec s based on hei
own knowledge, expe iences, and commi men o he exis ing sys em o in e na ional
peacebuilding and de elopmen coope a ion a he han p io i izing he knowledge,
expe iences, needs, and demands o he nominal bene icia ies o hei policies and
p ojec s. The chap e links his knowledge hie a chy o pos colonial con es a ions o
he “coloniali y o powe ” (Ke ne , his olume), which de ines a ionali y as libe al,
linking i o Wes e n educa ion and science (Ca uso and Waldow 2024, his olume).
Mülle and do Mon e use B azil’s peacekeeping sc ip o demons a e he complic-
i y o libe al in e en ionism and eli e libe alism. B azil used i s leading ole in he
Uni ed Na ions S abiliza ion Mission o Hai i o p omo e an “al e na i e,” explici ly
“Sou he n,” peacekeeping app oach as a less coe ci e and mo e de elopmen al al e -
na i e o he Wes e n in e en ionism o he 1990s. In a simila ein, B azil con es ed
he in e na ional communi y’s in oca ion o he Responsibili y o P o ec o jus i y
he in e en ion in Libya by ad ancing he idea o Responsibili y while P o ec ing
as a ( eally) libe al al e na i e. The chap e , howe e , decons uc s his pos colonial
peacebuilding sc ip as he ex e naliza ion o a iolen and exclusiona y o m o go -
e ning secu i y de eloped by B azilian eli es claiming o enac a be e e sion o
he libe al sc ip . Ra he han cons aining he exe cise o coe ci e s a e powe o
p o ec indi idual eedom, he B azilian app oach molded coe ci e and legal pow-
e s o uphold he sociopoli ical s a us quo. In his way, he chap e poin s o he
s ong ension be ween uni e sal claims and he need o en o ce and enac hose
claims locally, which is a majo poin o con es a ion o he libe al sc ip , pa icu-
la ly by pos colonialism (Meh a, 1999; Ke ne 2024, his olume; Menzel 2024, his
olume).
P akash, inally, s udies he ise o populism and illibe al democ acy in India. He
s a s by explo ing he ela ionship be ween populism and he libe al sc ip . P e-
sen ing i sel as a democ a ic co ec i e o (neo)libe al poli ics, populism claims o
sol e he ension be ween libe y, indi idual igh s, and he ule o law, on he one
hand, and equali y, e ec i e ep esen a ion, and popula so e eign y, on he o he ,
by sepa a ing he libe al om he democ a ic h ead o he libe al sc ip . To es o e
In oduc ion 17
he aspi a ions o popula so e eign y, populism subo dina es he libe al indi id-
ual o he democ a ic collec i e. Using India as an example, he chap e shows how
populism eeds on he b oken p omises o he libe al sc ip , pa icula ly ega ding
economic equali y, cul u al ecogni ion, and poli ical ep esen a ion. Cons uc ing
he ope o a homogenous popula will ha knows no opposi ion, populism claims
o be able o deli e on hese p omises. The chap e hus poin s o he e e nal en-
sion be ween indi idual igh s and collec i e sel -de e mina ion in he libe al sc ip
and discusses a case in which he ension is cu en ly esol ed so one-sidedly ha i
a guably u ns in o an ex e nal con es a ion o he libe al sc ip .
I becomes e iden ha besides he p oblems o inconsis encies o speci ic com-
ponen s o he libe al sc ip , ensions be ween di e en componen s also u n in o
he a ge o majo con es a ions. While Zü n and Ge schewski (2024, his olume)
aim o cap u e ou ensions insc ibed in he libe al sc ip mo e sys ema ically, he
chap e s in his sec ion show ha he e a e eal-wo d ensions ha i he ypology
bu u n ou o be mo e complica ed.
4 Conclusion
The book ad ances he concep o he libe al sc ip and i s con es a ion as a way o
shed new ligh on he cu en wa e o a acks agains libe al ideas, ins i u ions, and
p ac ices. The sociological no ion o he libe al sc ip , wi h i s di e en laye s and
componen s, highligh s he buil -in ensions. I a oids he no ma i e e inemen o
libe al heo ies based on a a ional econs uc ion. The ensions allow o an unde -
s anding o bo h he a ie ies and he con es a ions o he libe al sc ip . Va ie ies o
he libe al sc ip di e on how hey esol e inhe en ensions. A he same ime, hey
can only claim o be libe al as long as hey do no gi e one side absolu e p io i y
o e he o he . Denying o eigne s he igh o claim asylum is no a libe al means o
con ol bo de s. Placing hese ensions a he cen e o he analysis o con es a ion o
he libe al sc ip leads o an imp o ed unde s anding o hei endogenous sou ces o
con es a ion. Schola s o In e na ional Rela ions, o ins ance, seem o ag ee ha he
cu en con es a ions a e mainly p oduced by ensions inhe en in he in e na ional
o de and global go e nance s uc u es a he han by exogenous ac o s, such as
powe ansi ions, pandemics, o wa s (Bo¨ zel and Zü n 2021; Godda d e al. 2024;
Zü n 2018). Making na ional so e eign y condi ional upon he p o ec ion o basic
human igh s has gi en ise o majo con es a ions, no leas because o he use o
double s anda ds by libe al s a es. The concep o libe al sc ip allows o analyze hese
ensions in hei a ie ies and hei e ec s on con es a ions ac oss di e en imes and
spaces. By del ing deep in o he subsc ip s, componen s, and ensions, ou socio-
logical concep ion o he libe al sc ip p o ides he aw ma e ial o explaining i s
con es a ions.
The no ion o subsc ip s and componen s allows o a mo e conc e e and issue-
speci ic elabo a ion o he ensions wi hin he libe al sc ip . Fo ins ance, he ension
be ween indi idual and collec i e sel -de e mina ion plays ou in he o de subsc ip
18 Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
di e en ly han in he bo de subsc ip . The la e case conce ns he ension be ween
he igh o he indi idual o mo e ac oss bo de s and he igh o he collec i e o
con ol hem. The o me ouches on issues o mino i y igh s and he o e - o unde -
cons i u ionaliza ion o poli ical majo i ies. Each subsc ip has been a he o igin o
a leas one o mul iple c ises he wo ld has been acing since he u n o he 21s
cen u y: bo de s and mass mig a ion, o de s and democ a ic eg ession, alloca ion
and inancial c isis, empo ali y and clima e change a e he ca chwo ds he e. A he
same ime, he libe al sc ip appea s o be con es ed a all on s om bo h sides o he
libe al spec um, bu no by a nonlibe al o illibe al al e na i e. Ra he , con es a ions
a e o en selec i e and nega i e, ejec ing ce ain componen s o he libe al sc ip
while accep ing o adop ing o he s.
Finally, he concep poin s o he mu ual en anglemen o he sc ip and i s con-
es a ions. On he one hand, con es a ions can be g ouped acco ding o which
componen s o ensions o he libe al sc ip a e a ge ed. On he o he hand, he lib-
e al sc ip can be cap u ed by analyzing i s con es a ions. Libe al is wha is con es ed
as libe al o no libe al enough. While eligious undamen alism a acks he libe al
sc ip o i s ex eme indi idualism, adical libe a ianism denies collec i es he igh
o in e e e wi h hei indi idual eedom.
Ou jou ney in o cha ing he libe al sc ip ends a i s s a ing poin : he cu en
con es a ions o he libe al sc ip . This jou ney has shown ha a b oad dis inc ion
be ween in e nal and ex e nal con es a ions can be d awn (c . Bo¨ zel and Zü n,
2020). In e nal con es a ions ocus on he implemen a ion o speci ic libe al ideas
and p inciples and he conc e e wo king o ins i u ions. They do no ques ion he lib-
e al p inciples as such, bu challenge how hese p inciples a e in e p e ed o applied.
O en his en ails demands o hei applica ion o an ex ended g oup o add essees.
Fi ing examples can be he demand o he plu ali y o li es yles (e.g., same-sex
ma iage) o c i icizing he implemen a ion o ule o law in a gi en coun y (e.g.,
Hunga y). In e nal con es a ions can also denounce ex eme in e p e a ions and
applica ions o libe al p inciples. Communi a ianism, o ins ance, opposes ex eme
indi idualism and (neo-)libe al policies ha unde mine he social bonds o a com-
muni y and he commi men o sha ed alues and no ms (A ine i and De-Shali
1992; Bell 1993; Schmid and Tha che 2013). Ex e nal con es a ions do no aim
o s eng hen he implemen a ion o libe al p inciples bu ejec hem al oge he .
These con es a ions would see sexual mino i y igh s o judicial checks on popula
so e eign y as pa o libe al decadence. O hey would epudia e he uni e salism
o human igh s as a means o Wes e n dominance.
The issues discussed in sec ion 3 o his in oduc ion s uc u e he book as a whole.
The con ibu ions o Pa II ocus on me hodological issues and ques ions abou he
co e o he libe al sc ip and i s a ie ies. Pa III zooms in o libe al subsc ip s, while
Pa IV goes deepe s ill and is dedica ed o componen s o libe alism. I also opens
he discussion on ensions and con es a ions, which is he cen al ocus o Pa IV. In
he las chap e o he book, F eeden syn hesizes and e alua es he mul idisciplina y
insigh s o e ed by he a ious con ibu ions, de eloping a enues o u u e esea ch.
In oduc ion 19
Re e ences
Al husse , Louis (2014): On he Rep oduc ion o Capi alism. Ideology and Ideological
S a e Appa a uses. London / New Yo k: Ve so Books.
Adle , Emanuel; Poulio , Vincen (2011): In e na ional P ac ices. In In e na ional Theo y
3 (1), pp. 1–36.
A end , Hannah (1966[1951]): The O igins o To ali a ianism [1951]. (Ten h edi ion).
Cle eland: Me idian.
A ine i, Shlomo; De-Shali , A ne (Eds.) (1992): Communi a ianism and Indi idualism.
Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Bell, Daniel (1993): Communi a ianism and I s C i ics. Ox o d: Cla endon P ess.
Bell, Duncan (2014): Wha Is Libe alism? In Poli ical Theo y 42 (6), pp. 682–715.
Boli, John; Thomas, Geo ge M. (1999): Cons uc ing Wo ld Cul u e. In e na ional
Nongo e nmen al O ganiza ions since 1875. S an o d: S an o d Uni e si y P ess.
Bo¨ zel, Tanja A.; Risse, Thomas (2023): The Libe al Sc ip be ween Indi idual and
Collec i e Sel -De e mina ion. SCRIPTS Wo king Pape No. 26. Be lin: Clus e o
Excellence 2055 “Con es a ions o he Libe al Sc ip (SCRIPTS).”
Bo¨ zel, Tanja A.; Zü n, Michael (2021): Con es a ions o he Libe al In e na ional O de :
F om Libe al Mul ila e alism o Pos na ional Libe alism. In: In e na ional O ganiza-
ion 75 (2), pp. 282–305.
Bo¨ zel, Tanja A.; Zü n, Michael (2020): Con es a ions o he Libe al Sc ip . A Resea ch
P og am. SCRIPTS Wo king Pape No. 1, Be lin: Clus e o Excellence 2055 “Con es-
a ions o he Libe al Sc ip (SCRIPTS).”
Capoccia, Gio anni (2016): When Do Ins i u ions “Bi e”? His o ical Ins i u ionalism
and he Poli ics o Ins i u ional Change. In Compa a i e Poli ical S udies 49 (8),
pp. 1095–1127.
Con ad, Sebas ian (2016): Wha is Global His o y? P ince on: P ince on Uni e si y
P ess.
C ozie , Michel e al. (1975): The C isis o Democ acy: A epo on he Go e nabili y o
Democ acies o he T ila e al Commission. New Yo k: New Yo k Uni e si y P ess.
Fanon, F an z (1963): The W e ched o he Ea h. New Yo k: Go e .
F eeden, Michael (1994): Poli ical Concep s and Ideological Mo phology. In: Jou nal o
Poli ical Philosophy 2 (2), pp. 140–164.
F eeden, Michael (1996): Ideologies and Poli ical Theo y: A Concep ual App oach.
Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
F eeden, Michael (2003): Ideology: A Ve y Sho In oduc ion. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e -
si y P ess.
F eeden, Michael (2006): Ideology and Poli ical Theo y. In Jou nal o Poli ical Ideologies
11 (1), pp. 3–22.
F eeden, Michael (2015): Libe alism: A Ve y Sho In oduc ion. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni-
e si y P ess.
20 Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
F ied ich, Ca l J.; B zezinski, Zbigniew K. (1956): To ali a ian Dic a o ship and Au oc-
acy. New Yo k: P aege .
Ge ing, John (1997): Ideology: A De ini ional Analysis. In Poli ical Resea ch Qua e ly
50 (4), pp. 957–994.
Gioia, Dennis A.; Poole, Pe e P. (1984): Sc ip s in O ganiza ional Beha io . In Academy
o Managemen Re iew 9 (3), pp. 449–459.
Godda d, S acie E.; K ebs, Ronald R.; K eude -Sonnen, Ch is ian; Ri be ge , Be hold
(2024): Con es a ion in a Wo ld o Libe al O de s. In Global S udies Qua e ly 4 (2),
pp. 1–12.
God eau, Isa P. (2015): Sc ip s o Blackness: Race, Cul u al Na ionalism, and US
Colonialism in Pue o Rico. U bana Champaign: Uni e si y o Illinois P ess.
Go man, E ing (1956): The P esen a ion o Sel in E e yday Li e. New Yo k: Double-
day.
Habe mas, Jü gen (1998): Be ween Fac s and No ms. Camb idge, MA: The MIT P ess.
Haley, Usha C.V.; Haley, Geo ge T. (2016): Think Local, Ac Global: A Call o Recog-
nize Compe ing, Cul u al Sc ip s. In Managemen and O ganiza ion Re iew 12 (1),
pp. 205–216.
Hall, Pe e A. (1986): Go e ning he Economy: The Poli ics o S a e In e en ion in
B i ain and F ance. Camb idge: Poli y P ess.
Ha is, Richa d; Ha is, Kim; Ba on, S e e (2003): Thea ical Se ice Expe iences: D a-
ma ic Sc ip De elopmen wi h Employees. In In e na ional Jou nal o Se ice Indus y
Managemen 14 (2), pp. 184–199.
Hu ell, And ew (2007): On Global O de : Powe , Values, and he Cons i u ion o
In e na ional Socie y. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Imme gu , Ellen M. (2006): Pa adigms o Change in Poli ical Science: His o ical-
Ins i u ionalism and he P oblem o Change. In And eas Wimme ; Reinha d Ko¨ßle
(Eds.): Unde s anding Change: Models, Me hodologies and Me apho s. Basings oke:
Palg a e Macmillan, pp. 237–259.
Jackson, Ronald L. (2006): Sc ip ing he Black Masculine Body: Iden i y, Discou se, and
Racial Poli ics in Popula Media. New Yo k: Suny P ess.
Ka zens ein, Pe e J. (2022): The Down all o he Ame ican O de ? In Pe e J. Ka zens ein;
Jona han Ki shne (Eds.): Libe alism’s An inomy: Endings as Beginnings? I haca:
Co nell Uni e si y P ess, pp. 165–184.
K a ochwil, F ied ich (1989): Rules, No ms, and Decisions: On he Condi ions o P ac i-
cal and Legal Reasoning in In e na ional Rela ions and Domes ic A ai s. Camb idge:
Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
K isch, Nico (2010): Beyond Cons i u ionalism. The Plu alis S uc u e o Pos na ional
Law. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Lechne , F ank J.; Boli, John (2005): Wo ld Cul u e: O igins and Consequences. Malden:
Blackwell Publishing.
Lo d, Robe G.; Ke nan, Ma y C. (1987): Sc ip s as De e minan s o Pu pose ul Beha -
io in O ganiza ions. In Academy o Managemen Re iew 12 (2), pp. 265–277.
In oduc ion 21
Mandle , Jean M. (1984): S o ies, Sc ip s, and Scenes. Aspec s o Schema Theo y.
Hillsdale: Lau ence E lbaum Associa es.
Ma ch, James G.; Olsen, Johan P. (1989): Redisco e ing Ins i u ions. The O ganiza ional
Basics o Poli ics. New Yo k: The F ee P ess.
Mead, Geo ge He be (1934): Mind, Sel and Socie y. Chicago: Uni e si y o Chicago
P ess.
Meh a, Uday Singh (1999): Libe alism and Empi e: A S udy in Nine een h-Cen u y
B i ish Libe al Though . Chicago: Uni e si y o Chicago P ess.
Meye , John W.; Boli, John; Thomas, Geo ge M.; Rami ez, F ancisco O. (1997): Wo ld
Socie y and he Na ion-S a e. In Ame ican Jou nal o Sociology 103 (1), pp. 144–181.
Mülle , Jan-We ne (2011): Con es ing Democ acy: Poli ical Ideas in Twen ie h-Cen u y
Eu ope. New Ha en: Yale Uni e si y P ess.
No h, Douglass C. (1990): Ins i u ions, Ins i u ional Change, and Economic Pe o -
mance. New Yo k: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
O e, Claus (1972): S uk u p obleme des spa¨ kapi alis ischen S aa es. Au sa¨ ze zu Poli-
ischen Soziologe (1s edi ion). F ank u am Main: Suh kamp Ve lag.
Pi s, Jenni e (2009): A Tu n o Empi e. P ince on: P ince on Uni e si y P ess.
Rawls, John (1979): Eine Theo ie de Ge ech igkei (1s edi ion). F ank u am Main:
Suh kamp Ve lag.
Reckwi z, And eas (2002): Towa d a Theo y o Social P ac ices: A De elopmen in
Cul u alis Theo izing. In Eu opean Jou nal o Social Theo y 5 (2), pp. 243–263.
Rosenbla , Helena (2018): The Los His o y o Libe alism. P ince on: P ince on Uni e -
si y P ess.
Sachsenmaie , Dominic (2018): Global En anglemen s o a Man Who Ne e T a eled.
A Se en een h-Cen u y Chinese Ch is ian and His Con lic ed Wo lds. New Yo k:
Columbia Uni e si y P ess.
Saul, Ben (2022): Wes e n Hypoc isy o e he Russian In asion o Uk aine. Aus alian
Book Re iew (444). A ailable online a h ps://www.aus alianbook e iew.com.
au/979-july-2022-no-444/9296- he-law-o - he-jungle-wes e n-hypoc isy-o e - he-
ussian-in asion-o -uk aine-by-ben-saul, upda ed in 07/2022.
Schank, Roge C.; Abelson, Robe P. (1977): Sc ip s, Plans, Goals and Unde s and-
ing. An Inqui y in o he Human Knowledge S uc u e. Hillsdale: Lau ence E lbaum
Associa es.
Scha zki, Theodo e R. (2001): In oduc ion: P ac ice Theo y. In Theodo e R. Scha zki;
Ka in Kno Ce ina; Eike on Sa igny (Eds.): The P ac ice Tu n in Con empo a y
Theo y. London: Rou ledge, pp. 1–14.
Schmid , Vi ien A.; Tha che , Ma k (2013): Resilien Libe alism in Eu ope’s Poli ical
Economy. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Shkla , Judi h (1989): The Libe alism o Fea . In Judi h Shkla (Ed.): Libe alism and he
Mo al Li e. Camb idge, MA: Ha a d Uni e si y P ess, pp. 21–38.
Tocque ille, Alexis de (1994 [1835/1840]): On Democ acy in Ame ica. London: Fon ana
P ess.
22 Tanja A. Bö zel, Johannes Ge schewski, and Michael Zü n
Zü n, Michael (2018): A Theo y o Global Go e nance. Au ho i y, Legi imacy, and
Con es a ion. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Zü n, Michael; Ge schewski, Johannes (2021): Ske ching he Libe al Sc ip . A Ta ge
o Con es a ions. Be lin: Clus e o Excellence 2055 “Con es a ions o he Libe al
Sc ip (SCRIPTS).”
Zü n, Michael; Fe nández Rod íguez, Nie es; Ro¨llicke, Lena; Weckeman, Maximilian;
Schmo z, Alexande ; Gosepa h, S e an (2024): Towa ds a Typology o Con es a-
ions: Fou Types o Con es an s, SCRIPTS Wo king Pape No. 44, Be lin: Clus e
o Excellence 2055 “Con es a ions o he Libe al Sc ip (SCRIPTS)”.
