Michael Oakeshott’s political philosophy of civil association and constructivism in International Relations

Abstract

This article shows the relevance of Oakeshott’s political philosophy for the contemporary constructivist debate in International Relations. First, the article argues that Oakeshott’s perspective stresses that political institutions are based on norms and relationships which result from human understanding. Second, it elaborates on Nicholas Rengger’s recent work and reveals that Oakeshott’s On Human Conduct presents considerations pertaining to international politics that are consistent with his broader political philosophy. These observations concern the nature of war, the historical role of colonialism and the evolution of international society. Third, this article discusses Terry Nardin’s notion of ‘practical association’ and Christian Reus-Smit’s criticism of it. It contends that international civil association is a relationship between states based on understood and socially constructed moral values and practices. Finally, the article claims that customary international law declares and reflects these values and practices. As such, it reveals that Oakeshott’s notion of authority and his theory of civil association illuminate the possibility of an international legal order without a legislative office. This is of particular relevance also because of the Hobbesian influence on Oakeshott. Overall, this article illustrates how Michael Oakeshott’s theory of civil association sheds light on the nature of international society and law.