Evolutionary Paradigm for Global Politics Author(s): George Modelski Reviewed work(s): Source: International Studies Quarterly, Vol.

40, No. 3, Special Issue: Evolutionary Paradigms in the Social Sciences (Sep., 1996), pp. 321-342 Published by: Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of The International Studies Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2600714 . Accessed: 18/08/2012 00:41
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley-Blackwell and The International Studies Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Studies Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

International StudiesQuarterly (1996) 40, 321-342

EvolutionaryParadigm forGlobal Politics

GEORGE MODELSKI

Seattle University Washington, of for herepresented consists of The evolutionary paradigm globalpolitics of is four propositions: The globalpolitical key (1) system a population a complex that constitutes or policies strategies; globalpolitics (2) system for in evoluevolves specifiable conditions; accounting globalpolitical (3) are whosekeyoperators variation tionis a four-phased learning process and and (innovation), cooperation, selection, reinforcement; (4) global withglobal economics, and coevolves politics community, opinionet in sheds on cetera. evolutionary The paradigm light two processes particuand rise of atthe lar:theformation institutions global level, the anddecline ofworld powers longcycle). (the

Two propositionsare centralto thisarticle: of 1. The institutions worldpoliticsevolve,thatis, theyundergo change subject to identifiable evolutionary processes;and 2. The riseand decline ofworldpowers(thelong cycle)is a mechanismofglobal politicalevolution. of and widelyaccepted arBy institutions world politicswe mean constitutive rangementsin respectto war and peace, nation-states, alliances,and international law. If we consider these organization,and to global leadershipand international arrangementsin a sufficiently long perspective,say, over the span of the past millennium, cannotbut help noticingsignificant we changes thathave occurredin relation to these, that continue to affectthem, and that thereforeneed to be of understoodand explained. We need a structural-historical theory worldpolitics. whichhas been the lead story over thepast The riseand decline ofworldpowers, fewcenturiesofworldpolitics,also needs to be understoodin a widerframework. It is not the case of some eternalstruggle powerbut ratherthatofa mechanism for that in the recent past has mediated major changes in world political and social of We organization. need to see thelong cyclenot in isolationbut as a feature world institutional growth. in understand worldpolitics itstimedimensionin particular, That iswhy, better to of we require an evolutionary framework. What mightbe the salientfeatures such a paradigm?

Author's note:This articletakesoffon the last twosectionsof "From Leadership to Organization:The Evolutionof Paradigmsin the Social Sciences at Global Politics"(Modelski, 1995a). It was presentedat theworkshopEvowoutionary the University Washington, of Seattle,May 13-14, 1994. 01996 International Studies Association. Road,Oxford UK. Published Blackwell by Publishers, MainStreet, 238 Cambridge, 02142,USA,and 108Cowley MA OX4 1JF,

322

Paradigm GlobalPolitics for Evolutionary

EvolutionaryParadigms
of Types Evolution

the What is a paradigm? A paradigm is an exemplarypatternthat identifies key it variables;moregenerally is a setofcanons forthe questionsand thefundamental that is espoused, or shared, by a statementof problems of general significance researchcommunity. It a Whatdoes thepattern exemplify? represents conceptionofthenaturalorder of things,and specifieswhat, in a particularrealm, is to be normallyexpected. Explanations then amount to showingwhyactual eventsdivergefrom"normal," for A what thatis, "reasonable,"expectations. paradigm defines, a class of events, standsto reason. An evolutionary paradigm is one such pattern.KennethBoulding (1981:9, 25), in "a of describeditas "a pattern theuniverse," pattern space-time." a socialscientist, not Like Herbert Spencer beforehim,1Boulding saw thispatterncharacterizing only the biologicalworld but also the physicaluniverse,viewed on the verylarge Spencer,cultureis added and also the socialworld.If,following scale ofcosmology, fourtypesof to that list as a separate realm, also subjectto these considerations, evolutionemerge-physical, biological,social,and cultural-whichcan be ranked processes. Thus along a time axis according to the period of theirevolutionary of cosmologyand geologyoperate on a timescale ofbillionsofyears;the story life, and the animal kingdomon earth,is reckonedover tens and hundredsof million does not extend much over years. Social organization,forhumans in particular, time has and culture an even shorter hundredsofthousandyears,intosome million, but make up evolution, theyall need to span. All of thesemajor processestogether be kept distinct, too, ifonlybecause theirperiodsvary(Table 1). That makes evolution a pervasive pattern of some considerable power and It generality. is indispensablein graspinglong-rangeprocesses even though it is and not claimed to be a patternof everything does not explain everyclass of event of involves or process. But does thatalso mean thatthe study evolutionnecessarily of a hierarchy sciences,and thatbiology,as the science of life,has an inherentor in of theory? claim on priority insight evolutionary overriding all In theory, branchesof knowlNot necessarily. the evolutionof evolutionary in edge (thatare fieldsofculture)have participated thepast and continuedoing so. with In mid nineteenth biologistCharlesDarwincapturedpublicattention century, an account of the origin of the species, and his name came to be completely identified withthe concept of evolutionby naturalselection.But his own insights were profoundly shaped, not onlyby earlierworkin geology,such and discoveries (that as thatof Charles Lyell,whose principleof "uniformitarianism" past changes but are to be accountedforbyprocessesstillin operation)is basic to Darwin'swork, Thomas Malthus's"Essayon the workin earlydemography, also by thatformative HerbertSpencer developed his Principleof Population."Whatis more,sociologist own conceptof evolutioneven beforeDarwin'sworkhad appeared in print. That is whyeach typeof evolutionmay also be regarded as occupyingits own to domain, and privilegedtime-space.The knowledgeof each contributes evoluwork on all others.While tionarytheory,and researchesmutuallycross-fertilize full had haverecently particularly elaborationinbiological conceptions evolutionary
I In The Principles Sociology, threekindsof evolution: HerbertSpencer ([1885], 1910:vol. 1, 3-7) distinguished of nonorganic,organic,and superorganic.In his essay "The DevelopmentHypothesis"(1852) he had alreadydefended the "Theoryof Evolution"and rejectedspecial creation;in "Progress:Its Law and Cause" (1857) he argued thatthe same law of evolution ("of the simple into complex") held in the physical,biological, social, and cultural realms (reprintedin Spencer, 1910:1-62).

GEORGE MODELSKI
TABLE 1. Types of Evolution

323

Types ofEvolution Physical Biological Social Cultural

Complex systems that evolve Physicaluniverse (includingearth) Life on earth (organisms) Behavior (economic,political,societal,"cultural"*) Human artifacts memory and (languages,arts& sciences,cities,tools

in therelevant time (years) ftrame Ten billion Hundred million (l OOm) Million Tens of thousand

of "cultural"= behaviorforthe reproduction cultureand social institutions

no the theory, one should forget roles of geologyand astronomy pioneeringthe in or understandingof deep time. Claims to priority one-wayinfluenceby any one fieldof evolutionary study need to be treatedwithcaution.
Social Science Evolutionary Paradigms

The presentstudy therefore is located in social evolution, and in the social sciences, and concernsglobal politicsas one subtype social evolutionary of process.Whatare the essentialsof an evolutionary paradigmforthe social sciences?2 Accordingto R. C. Lewontin, in writing theInternational Encyclopedia SocialSciences ofthe (1968:203):
There is a hierarchy principlesin the evolutionary of world view: change, order, and direction, progress, perfectibility. theoriesare distinguished how Evolutionary by manyof theseare successively includedas essential.

These fiveprinciples serveas a convenient framework discussion. for The argument willbe that, presentpurposes,theessential for of ingredients the evolutionary paradigm forthe social sciencesare onlytwo:change, and direction.Order, progress, and perfectibility not essentialpartsof such a framework. are Change The mostbasic evolutionary considerations centeraround "change."An evolutionaryperspectiverepresents commitment the instability the presentorder as "a to of well as the past. In its simplestand irreducible formevolutionism the doctrine is that change of stateis an unvarying characteristic naturalsystems of and human institutions thatsuch change follows and immutable laws" (Lewontin,1968:203). Change ofstatein societiesmeans change in theeconomic,political,societal,and culturalstructures that constitute them. Structural change is to be distinguished from all routinesthatcharacterize social life(thisdistinction central, example, is for to the Nelson and Winter(1982) analysisof economic development).Structural innovation thatis a departurefromstandardoperatchange commonly represents is and thatiswhythestory socialevolution a recordofinnovation. of ing procedures, But structural of also takes time,and that is change, or the diffusion innovation,
2 We have no standard evolutionary paradigm for the social sciences. "Evolutionists"(for instance,Stephen Sanderson, 1991) emphasize "stages"of social development;othersprivilegemechanisms transformation. of

324

Paradigm GlobalPolitics for Evolutionary

requires a long invariably why the observationof change in human institutions perspective. in Such an approach is clearlystructuralist, thatit proposes thatthe persisting clusters social behaviorthatare subjectto social evolutionformemergentsocial of whose propertiescannot be deduced fromthe parts composing them, structures It of and in thatit focuseson transformations these structures. emphasizeschange, stages"whichare oftenseen as the principalproductsof ratherthan "evolutionary as or and often reified, even personified, in "capitalism."It is not evolutionanalysis, of structures, in functionalist thatit does not inquire into the functions persisting but it does searchforexplanationsof change in these structures. from "routine"change helps to get overthe problem "structural" Distinguishing that Lewontinraises, of separating"real" change froma stasisthat has only the change does not appearance of change. But to assertthat evolutionis structural thatorder is the naturaloutcome of evolutionary implythe statement necessarily processes. A more modest propositionwould stipulate that such processes are concerned with adaptation, that is, they might cope with a set of identifiable problems,in relationto whichtheymay,or maynot,be adaptive.
Directionality

also is a basic one. "By direction Lewontin'sthirdprinciple(1968:204), direction, in evolutionwe mean the concept thatthereis some naturallinear order of states and thatan evolutionary processcan be describedas passing through of the system successivestatesin thatorder" in a line thatis alwaysascendingor descending. or can Is the scale on which such directionality be measured differentiation, proposed it? Over verylong periods,we can as complexity, HerbertSpencer first in In and observe both differentiation increase in complexity social systems. the evolution of the world systemof the past millennium,a prominentinstance of where of has differentiation been the formation the global and national systems, too, theworld Arguably, therewas onlyregionaland local organization. previously was system less complex ca. 1000 thanitis going to be in theyear2000. But is such and ifso, how? due to evolution, and differentiation highercomplexity does not posit the existenceof a design,or blueprint;"genes are Directionality much more like a recipe than like a blueprint"(Dawkins,1987:296), and it is not searchforevidence of such design in nature. teleological,in the sense of implying developmentalsequences familiar proclaiming It does not lead to "lawsofhistory" in, and rejectedby, the social sciences,such as thatof "feudalism-+ capitalism" leading to the "finalgoal of socialism." does imply that evolution is not random and that it is a But directionality cumulativeprocess,wherebya successionof small changes can bringabout great and a set of transformations (Dawkins,1987:ch. 3). A recipe is a set of ingredients, organize the process in time thus givingit a temporal Instructions instructions. structure;evolution might be thoughtof as involvingsome such instructions. Ingredientscompose the conditionsthatinduce evolution;theydefinethe spatial aspect of thatprocess. can Directionality be made more tractableat shortertimeframesifit is understood to be the productof learning.J. W. Pringle(1951) has shownthatlearning viewed as increased complexityof behavior over time may be thought of as of complexusuallythought as increasedstructural equivalentto organicevolution, ity(in space); hence social evolutionis basicallyabout learningnew behavior (see also Campbell, 1969; Schull, 1991). Successfulsocial learningproduces structural is phased, has a distinct change; a learning process, furthermore, inherently be It hence direction. mighttherefore argued thatitis learningthat time-structure, to processes.It could be seen as a "natural"process givesdirectionality evolutionary

GEORGEMODELSKI

325

of as logicor programofadaptation, of trialand error, iftheunwinding an internal intention, of one thatdoes notrequirethepostulation a granddesignor purposeful but does call foran explanation. nor Such an approach is neitherdeterministic does it assume randomness;it is projectingforit a fixedcontentor a It directionality without probabilistic.3 favors finite purpose, and does not requirethe teleologicalassumptionof a finalgoal or destination.It requires adjustmentto changing conditionsof the world system, and but technology, wealth, does population,urbanization, includingenvironment, under not require the assumptionof a grand design. All it says is thatthe system manner,and accordingto codes, or programs, study proceeds on itswayin a certain thatneed to be explicated.It obeysa setofrulesin thatitplaysout in a givennatural out that and social environment includesotherprocessesand policieseach carrying theirown programs.All such a model does is to postulatean "innerlogic,"4thatis, that the formal-logical requirementthat the processes evince a time-structure them. constrains
and Progress Perfectibility

There is a traditionof long standing(cf. reviewin Ginsberg,1961) that regards of progress as an essentialcharacteristic evolution.Progressis not identicalwith in certaincriteria thatsatisfies but evolution, is linkedto it:itis evolution a direction of formulations the idea of progressdate fromthe era of of value. The prominent were those of The most famous among these formulations the Enlightenment. which included equality,and peace, do not seem as Condorcet; and his criteria, of the were once made out to be. Butwhether study social evolution utopian as they of for can by itself provide the relevantcriteria value is a matter debate. And even ifthe criteria as were agreed on, thereis room fordisagreement to whetheror to the be what degree the record of human history, it of the twentieth century, last or millennium, thepast 10,000years,showsprogressin thehumancondition.Some maintainthat any such claim is misplaced and that no such social evolutionists progresshas in factoccurred. both on empiricaland on theoretical stillopen to discussion, These are matters grounds. But they make it clear that it would be unwise to include progress, movementin a "good" direction,among the essential traitsof social evolution. preciselywhat mightbe meant by specifying Biologistshave had some difficulty it biologicalprogress.Suffice to saythata "learning"conceptionofthedirectionality of of evolutionkeeps open the possibility progress, leaves the determination of but of the precise characteristics that progressto the analysisof cases. A "learning" components conceptionof social evolutionleaves room not onlyfor"materialist" and love) thatmake (ofwealthand power),but also for"idealist"elements(oftruth fora well-rounded analysis. This again is a is Lewontin'sfifth principle,perfectibility,even more stringent. of who saw it as a limittowardwhich the criterion Condorcet (a mathematician), it. without ever attaining Today evolutionis more often process mightbe moving, viewed as an endless process with no ultimategoal or destination,and even a place adaptation to currentproblems "learning" conception stressesin the first
3 C. R. Hallpike (1986:19 ff.)distinguishes fourtypesof themesin debates thathave characterizedevolutionary the processesare endogenous,or exogenous; (2) whether theoriesto explain them thought:(1) Whetherevolutionary the or theyare materialist idealist;and (4) whether processesare or are or should be structuralist atomist;(3) whether ratherthan determinist; our In or deterministic random (stochastic). regardto directionality positionis probabilistic the otherthemesare touchedon elsewherein thisstudy. 4 Peter Corning(1983:43 ff.) teleology).RobertWesson reaches "beyondnatural calls this"teleonomy" internal (or as a and views(1991:144) thegenome,whoseessence is self-organization, an "attractor": "set selection"to chaos theory or "The genome is ... a pattern a program"forbuildingan organism. statesof a system." of permitted

326

Paradigm GlobalPolitics for Evolutionary

rather than final purpose. But as Lewontin points out (1968:206), if there is cannot be altogetherignored. on then perfectibility directionality some criterion, it Indeed, forsocialevolution raisestheproblemofa possiblelifecycleforthehuman species. Could itbe programmedto die out at the end of such a cycle?
Macro-and Microevolution

change, principles:structural This discussionleaves us withtwomain evolutionary It and formal-logical directionality. remains to point out that these are broadly macro-and microevoluequivalentto the twomajor divisionsofbiologicaltheory: even ifthedividingline betweenmacro and tion.These are verybasic distinctions, and explanation,is not as sharp as it mightbe thoughtto be. micro,description (such as Ayala, 1982; Pollard, 1984) commonlynow divide Biological theorists intotwoareas,macroevolution microevoand theory evolutionary thesynthetic) (or meaning the evolutionof all livinggroups,considersthe lution. Macroevolution, It evolutionhas occurredand bywhatpathways. was called the questionofwhether theory descentby Darwin(who definedevolutionas descentwithmodification), of witha strongdescriptive element. and sometimesis called the factof evolution, of Darwin's "tree of life"is the mostgeneral graphicrepresentation the observed factsof evolutionary change. of is of Darwinsuggestedthat Microevolution thestudy themechanism evolution. natural selection is a chief mechanismthat explains the nonrandom aspects of of and thussuppliesa principalexplanationforthe observedvariety life evolution, These mechanisms but forms, we now thinkof it as one among such mechanisms. the of of can be thought as supplying directionality evolution. The discussion of Lewontin's principles has now brought the subject down also findsitself. do we wishto draw,in our But to essentially wherebiologicaltheory betweenmicro-and macroevolution, betweenfact a own analysis, sharp distinction and explanation? Probablynot,because the boundaries betweendescriptionand and classification, implya explanationare not reallythatsharp; good description, and convincing explanationsneed to be testedagainstdata collected good theory, scheme.What is more,macroanalysis requiresreliable on thebasis of a theoretical and knowledgeof microconditions, vice versa. How do such distinctions apply to the studyof social evolution?Are conditions such thatan "evolutionary analogy"is in factjustified?
versus Comte-Spencer Darwin

two Since the second halfof the nineteenth century, conceptionsof evolutionary and Auguste have existedside byside: theComte-Spencerian, theDarwinian. theory Comte, and afterhim, Herbert Spencer, proposed thathuman evolutionpassed Also referred as "evolutionism," to this through major stagesofsocial development. be in of viewemphasized major stagesthatmight manifested thehistory humanity, be and could therefore regarded as a formof "macroevolutionary" analysis. The Darwinian model elucidated a centralcausal mechanismof evolution to but for and explain continuity change in populations, avoided thetemptation quick processes. It centeredon the analysisof selection, explanationsof sociohistorical In to and forthatreason has also been referred as selectionism. the social sciences, is Darwinianselectionism a formof "microevolutionary" analysis. Over time,the Comte-Spencerian programfellintodisuse,even ifthe problem has itwas intended to tackle,understanding large-scalechange in human affairs, Darwiniantheoryexperienced a not disappeared. But in mid twentieth century, (Huxley, [1942], througha "modern synthesis" strongrevivaland reinvigoration was followed thediscovery the in and that by 1974) thatfollowed revolution genetics

GEORGE MODELSKI

327

analysis (e.g., Pollard,1984), ofDNA, whichin turnhas been subjectto muchcritical on and whichalso has exertedmuch influence the social sciences. Our projecthere is to combinethesetwoconceptions.Darwinianmicromechanisms of search and selection,as adapted to the social context,which have now become an accepted partof social science(cf.Nelson and Winter,1982; or Elster's in of represented our model, albeit in treatment selection,1989), are also strongly component of this project that raises novel forms.It is the "macroevolutionary" a because it paints,in broad strokes, largerquestionsand deservescloser scrutiny, in manner, with but of "big picture" globalpoliticalevolution theComte-Spencerian for new conceptsand in a waythatalso requiresDarwinism itsvalidity. and biology(as well as physics, All in all, thisdoes not implythatevolutionary theory. and the social sciencesmusthave an identicalevolutionary culturaltheory) or are social systems, how The question is not how much like biological systems much social behavioris rooted in biology.Nor is thatquestionpart of the debates thathave centeredaround Social Darwinism(cf.Campbell, 1969), even thoughit that to takingon a commitment biologicaldeterminism) is fairto assume (without biologicalcomponent. social behaviorhas a significant basis ofbiologyis micro-and Instead, the questionis: Given thatthe theoretical are macroevolution,in the sense that both change and directionality essential what additionalusefulanalogies mightthere theory, componentsof evolutionary if of mutandis, be forthesocial sciences, thesocialsystem thehumanspecies,mutatis processes?There are importantdifferences is viewed as subject to evolutionary betweenbiological organisms(not to mentionthe physicaluniverse,and culture) and they and societies, argueforkeeping,at thisstage,theseveralrealmsanalytically distinct. There is also the considerationthat, in the case of the social sciences, the but into thatundergo change are not unitary are differentiated at least structures and thereis notonlytheevolution Accordingly, society, culture. economics,politics, to of each of these structures be considered each in its own right,but also the each proceedingat itsown pace, but among theseevolvingstructures, relationship in and adaptive to, developments each of the otherprocesses.This is not sensitive, that of a problem(howtheevolution one speciesaffects ofothers)thatis apparently much or commonlystudied in biology:hence the problem of coevolution-how and relatesto the others.That is change in one set of social structures itsdirection whycoevolutionmaybe added to macro-and microevolution.
versus RationalChoice Evolutionary Paradigm

paradigmsforsocial sciencesembodyno claim to universalsolution Evolutionary to problems,but for foreveryproblem.They are fitted deal withsome important and the manyothersare not necessarily primeremedy.Ultimately, in thelong run, to thevariousparadigmsshould be mutually compatible, being attempts studythe directions. But in the enormouselephant of social lifefroma numberof different attainable. shorter maynot be immediately run,such compatibility In the social sciences today one importantparadigm is that representedby rationalchoice theories(cf. Elster,1989). It has an excellentpedigree, and a fine neoclassical economics being one of its successful methodology,contemporary withevolutionary How does itcontrast theory? incarnations. Most basically,rationalchoice is the studyof decision,that is, of actions to be Its are and constraints. time perspectives taken in the lightof given preferences, discountedby those of the rationaldecision maker,whichmightoftenbe severely lack of knowledgeor limitedby shorttimehorizons. Even more fundamentally, or no change, rationalchoice theoriesoffer purchaseon social structure structural as essential with and have difficulty processesthathave timeand directionality their

328

Evolutionary Paradigm GlobalPolitics for

Neoclassical economistshave not had much successin dealing with characteristics. structural unemployment, turnover leadand in long-term economicdevelopment, ing sectors.In political science, neorealistshave had some trouble coping with structural change at the global level. and rationalchoice approaches (see also The differences betweenevolutionary Modelski and Thompson, 1996:136) mightbe summarizedas follows:
Evolutionary Perspective horizon) (time Focusofexplanation Choiceprocess schema Ends-means Long-term Institutions, transitions Trialanderror search/selection Both preferences andconstraints arevariable Rational Choice Short-term Decisions, equilibrium Rational maximization Given constraints andpreferences, choice means of

in mightyieldbetterinsights the analysis In otherwords,rationalchoice theory of individualdecisionsand policychoices,but evolutionary approaches should give in of socialprocesses,and ofstructural change superiorresults thestudy long-range in particular.Evolutionary approaches do not require the postulateof rationality; of by theyallow forthepossibility trialand errorsolutions social selection.But they whichpolicydecisions mustbe formulated, also supplythe contextwithin just as of microchoices providea sound basis fortheunderstanding greatmovements. Such an approach places both "ends" and "means" togetherat the center of analysis.Both values and ideas, and power,both idealist (agendas, free societies) and materialist economic) componentsof social processes,are (politico-strategic, to equally implicatedin thisanalysis.This is notjust a case of trying have it both but to ways,in themannerofeclecticism, rathera deliberatestrategy coverthefour dimensionsof enduringsocial experience.5
NeedsExplaining? What

suitedto an evolutionWhatproblemsin the study worldpoliticsare particularly of accounting aryapproach? Global politicsevolutionmightbe definedas the theory forthe appearance of politicalorganizationat the global level,and the processes have acquired theirpresentform. Thereforethe bywhichglobal politicalstructures short answer is: structural change at the global level. That which changes, via is and to mechanisms be determined, theglobalpoliticalsystem, theprocessappears Not nation-states, countries, not inTable 1 as a subsetof(world)politicalevolution.6 but the global politicalsectorof theworldsystem.
5 This is the(late,evolutionary, notfunctionalist) thoughTalcottParsons Parsonianconceptionofsocial systems, but the did not employthe notionof dimension.We conjecturethatthe dimensionsof social processesreflect fourbasic and strongforce, electromagnetism, weak force).In recentdecades, muchofphysicsresearch forcesof nature(gravity, grand,and complete) conditionsunder whichthese forcesachieve (electroweak, has been concernedwithspecifying "unification"(cf. Horgan, 1994). model forglobal politics. an But thesame basic model helps elucidate we article specify evolutionary 6 In thepresent evolutionover but withglobal economicsand community, also worldsystem and itsinteraction notjust world politics, the last fivemillennia(cf.Modelski,1995b).

GEORGE MODELSKI

329

(the rules of the game) is Moreover,ifa distinction drawnbetweeninstitutions (as and organizations(the actorsor playersin thatgame, pursuingstrategies) does, e.g., North, 1990), twokindsof change willbe recognized:in major actors,and in of basic institutions global politics.A mostprominentinstanceof change in actors world over the mostrecent500 yearshas been the rise and selectionof successive powers (the most recentbeing thatof the United States)whichhas provided the basic pulse of global politics. change. A superThe other,longer-range processhas been thatof institutional ficial glance at world politicssuggeststo some onlookers nothingbut a chaos of perpetual "comingand going,"but in factthereis a patternto it: the successionof copingswitha parade ofglobal problems, worldpowersnotonlyinvolvedsuccessful change. For in the past 1,000 years, global but also powered basic institutional on beginning greaterglobal organization, politicshas moved steadily a path toward with failed attemptsat world empire that overshadowedthe earlier centuriesof and withtheriseofthenation-state system, moving history, continuing worldsystem increasingly into foraystowardworld organizationthat are also likelyto extend In intothe future. otherwords,in takinga long viewofworldpolitics, considerably we can perceivenotjust changes in actors,but also changes in basic institutions. in The outline of thatprocess,portrayed the thirdcolumn of Table 2, showsa successionof leading powers,centralto the global politicsof theirtime,grouped formsof global periods withcharacteristic into blocs of four,each representing is of period, Eurasian-centered, thatof the establishment organization.The first of and itsdefining feature thefailure the Mongol designforworld is preconditions, in showsthelaying empire.The second period,West-European spatialorientation, down of a nucleus of an emerging global systemin that area, withworldwide of The thirdperiod,opening about 1850, is the start global political repercussions. to after1945. Each period marksa transition new seriously takingoff organization, and institutions, new rules of politicalorganization. the confront factthatglobal politicsis subjectnot Studentsof thisfieldtherefore and continuousstructural change just to routineprocesses,but also to substantial at more thanone level; and thebasic questionbecomes:Whatexplains suchchange in the past millenniumso thatthe process can be projected into the near future? For in that millenniumthe formand substance of global organizationhas (a) inter alia, from a condition of minimal or nonexistent changed substantially, in structure and low connectivity one of substantialstructure conditions of to today.Moreover,thatdevelopmenthas been not substantially higherconnectivity (ratherthan merelyone of change, but also one thathas shown(b) directionality randomness), in that the change has embodied search for innovativeformsof organization(appropriate,interalia, to an expanding population), and has also tracedan orderly path in space, and exhibiteda temporalstructure. Put differently, significant aspectsofworldpoliticshave been about institutional Because global innovation, and about mechanismsand agentsof such innovation. paradigm is process,an evolutionary politicshas been subjectto an evolutionary some the likelyto afford best answersto questionsabout thatprocess,and tojustify confidenceforprojectionsinto the future.Such a paradigm accommodates and privileges (diachronic) studies across time, as in long-rangeprocesses, but also studies of conditions that favor and requires (synchronic)at-one-point-in-time governevolution. All thisrepresentsthe claim thattheoretical (Darwinian)biologyand the theoexamples of the use of one reticalsocial sciences are "equivalent,albeit different structure of calculus (or model), the theoretical and the same general theoretical this whichremainsthe same" (Schmid,1987:82). Arguably, therefore, same model in social processesand structures general,but in the formuaids in understanding will the of theory be specified lationhere attempted, basic propositions evolutionary

330

Paradigm GlobalPolitics for Evolutionary

Economics,Community, TABLE 2. The Coevolutionof Politics, and Opinion in the Global System(930-2100)

System Global Process (opinion)

CONSTRUCTION Renaissance

Lineage Democratic (model societies, andopposition)

EXPERIMENTS

Cycles Long (world powers andantecedents)

K-waves (global sectors) leading

SUNG BREAKTHROUGH KI Printing K2 National mkt K3 Adm.fisc.fr. K4 Marit.trade COMMERCIALNAUTICAL REVOLUTION K5 Champagne fairs K6 Black Sea trade K7 Galleyfleets K8 Pepper FRAMEWORK OF GLOBAL TRADE K9 Guinea gold K10 Indian spices Baltic K 11Atlantic, K12 Asian trade INDUSTRIAL TAKE-OFF K13 Am.plant. K14 Amerasiantr. K15 Cottonmanuf. K16 Steam,rail

930 PRECONDITIONS (EurasianTransition) DI Sung Reforms LC1 Northern Sung (Neo-Confucian) LC2 SouthernSung

D2 Italian Republican (Imperialmonarchical)

LC3 Genoa LC4 Venice GLOBAL NUCLEUS (WestEuropean) LC5 Portugal LC6 Dutch Republic

Enlightenment

D3 Dutch Reformed (Counterreformed) D4 British Liberal (Absolutist) DEMOCRACY

LC7 BritainI LC8 BritainII

World opinion

D5 Democratic groundwork

1850 GLOBAL ORGANIZATION INFORMATION AGE (Post-WestEuropean) K17 Electr.,chem. LC9 United States auto K18 Electronics, inds K19 Information LCI0 K20

and (nonlinear) Lineageare actor-driven Note:The numbered cycles, K-waves, phasesoftheDemocratic long and community, thoseactuating economics, globalpolitics, of evolutionary processes, respective mechanisms their of to processes; etc.)refer periods those The headings (CONSTRUCTION, formation. CAPITALIZED system global and a new eachperiod represents setofbasicrules institutions.

and It global structures, as applicable to global politicalstructures. is theseevolving thatare the subjects(or unit)of theevolutionary not individualpolitiesor societies, process. EvolutionaryGlobal Politics a Let us propose here, in respectto global politics, process model of evolutionary the of and or process change.A processisa sequence, string, events, wefit globalpolitical one. we of intothecausal structure theworldwhich taketo be an evolutionary It is a processmodel because itsinglesout foremphasischangesover timerather than static"stagesof development"thatsuch changes mightbe said to be bringing

GEORGE MODELSKI

331

analysis,both of change of about. But allowances are also made fora multilevel of actorsand of change in basic institutions worldpolitics. As applied to politicaleventsat the global level, the process model consistsof foursetsofbasic expectations: is 1. The global politicalsystem a populationof strategies; thatevolvesin specifiable 2. Global politicsis a complex system conditions; 3. Accountingforglobal politicalevolutionis a learningprocess,of which the key operators are variation(innovation),cooperation,selection,and reinand forcement; and opinion et 4. Global politicscoevolveswithglobal economics,community, cetera. paradigm; thatcomprisethepresentevolutionary These are thebasic propositions theymightbe called the "hard core," in Imre Lakatos's sense,of thisevolutionary for a these fourpropositionsoffer framework researchprogram.Taken together, the explanationof structural change in worldpolitics.
as of System a Population Strategies 1. GlobalPolitical

is system viewedas a set analysis theglobalpolitical pointforevolutionary The starting of These for management global problems. of policies(or strategies) the (collective) of be policiesmay(conceptually) carriedbya variety actorsor agents:worldempires; or or exercising, aspiringto, global leadership;alliancesand city-states nation-states But regimes;and worldorganizations. the emphasisat this coalitions;international the ingredients policy)but on the policies for point is not on actors (that afford of viewedas setsofinstructions, programs globalpotential. or themselves The instructions embodied in global policies providethe basis forthe standard Such routines of reproduce operatingrules,or routines, theglobal politicalsystem. Variationand innovathemselves throughprocessesof socializationand training. tion in these routinesis the materialforglobal politicalevolution,and occurs as generationsof policies succeed each other. of That whichexperiencesglobalpoliticalevolutionis thesocial organization the are human species; which makes it clear that nation-states not the basic units of of mayat timesbe carriers global worldpolitics,even thoughcertainnation-states such as the United Statesor policies.That also means thatpolicies of nation-states analysisonly insofaras theywere Japan became principal units of evolutionary if fitness, any, vehiclesor indicatorsof global politicalchange. Their evolutionary apply to evolution is a component of the global process. Similar considerations whose operationshouldbe specifiedin relationto the or viewedregionally, locally, of be processesis most global level.It might supposed thattheworking evolutionary markedat the species level.
Evolve 2. Complex Systems

Most basically this argumentrestsupon the conjecturethat the global political systemis a complex system,and thereforeit evolves. The explanation of the belonging to a evolutionof global politicsrestsupon the global political system all larger class of phenomena, that of complex systems, potential subjects of evolution.The argumenthas twoaspects: (1) global politicsevolvesbecause it is a conditions"are best satisfied. and (2) it evolveswhen "necessary complex system, The directionality evolutionarypolitics is that which Davies of Complexity. is The basic distinction betweencom(1984:239-40) calls "organizedcomplexity."

332

Politics Paradigm Global for Evolutionary

plex systemsand others that may be either orderly or chaotic. Ordered (or followa fixedpatternand have no flexibility capacityfor or equilibrium)systems are stand Complex systems change; chaoticsystems disorderedand unpredictable. capacity chaotic;theyhave sufficient at the "edge of chaos" but are not themselves That is,in thepresentcase, itis theargument forchange to adapt to newconditions. as (or system, postuthatworldpoliticsis neitheran equilibrium near-equilibrium) lated in traditional "balance of power"accounts,nor an anarchicone, in the sense one inwhich far and flexible, ofbeing chaotic,but is in factfluid, from equilibrium, fluctuations.7 order arises through Complex organizationof livingorganismscan be shownto arise spontaneously that is, a large collectionof similarsystems. given the existenceof an ensemble, thatis, to evolve. to Complexityhas been definedas the ability make transitions, Accordingto MurrayGell-Mann,a "complex adaptive system"is a collectionof to simple partsthatinteract forma complexwhole capable of learningabout, and reactingto, the outsideworld.8 In the present case, the relevantcollectionis the population of strategiesor will That wayexperiments occurwithalternative and future. policies,past,present, innovation comes along thatis selectedout conditions, strategies until,in favorable The accumulationof countlessinnovaand thencumulatesthroughamplification. as as tions,large and small,leads to systems intricate modernmarketeconomiesor freedemocraticcommunities. or or thereis no need To showdirectionality, future-orientation, "naturalness," as or but to embracedeterminism assume"progress," in "evolutionism"; topostulate onlythattheevolutionary processunfoldsin accordancewithan innerlogic and/or in sequential structure, thateach phase createsthe conditionsforthe next,always Such a process requires some respondingto new conditionsin the environment. but otherthan "searchfora capacityto anticipatethe future no greatermotivation betterlife,"or as Adam Smithput it,when accountingforwhatpromptshumanity "desireforbettering condition." our to save, the ever-present A complementary dependence on initialcondiassumptionis thatof "sensitive have an important effect thecourseof developon tions":thatthebeginningforms ment in that theyhelp cumulatethe resultsof early changes, a basic reason for the change whichwe also thinkof as examiningcarefully timepath of structural path-dependent. David (1988:18) describesprocesseswhose outcomes are pathdependent as those dynamicprocesses in which the position and motion of the and are to They are system, itsconstituent subsystems, "sensitive initialconditions." characterized nonergodicity by (theydo notpass throughall the statescompatible Both with the energyof the system over the course of time) and irreversibility. and future-orientation to the factthatthe processesunder refer path-dependency studyhave a temporalstructure.

7 Note, though,the recentfinding Diana Richards(1993:62) that"the evolutionof power" in the international by is system "a chaoticprocess."This was based on a diagnostictestto determine whetherthe (Modelski-Thompson)sea powerconcentration timeserieswas the resultofa stochastic a chaoticprocess. or 8 According Murray to Gell-Mann(1994), complexity theory rests twoideas: (1) Complexity notmerely quality on is a to be noted but a quantity thatcan be measured.Complex systems tendover timeto giveriseto morecomplex systems. become morecomplex,they But as systems giveriseto "emergent properties" thatmaynotbe understood.(2) Complex adaptive systems everywhere are alike; forinstance,the processof learning-testinga model against reality and then modifying to suit-occurs at different it timescales throughout biology. 9 Citing Brian Arthur,David (1988:39) describes structures that produce strong "historicallock-ins"as those characterizedby a source of local positivefeedback, source of perturbations fluctuations, somethingcausing a or and the progressivediminutionin the comparativestrength random perturbations. of The initial state of the system combinedwiththe ensuingfluctuations to push the dynamicsinto the domain of one of asymptotic acts states(stable attractors, emergentstructures), thusto "select"the structure or and thatthe system eventually locks into.These are conditionsfavoring evolution.

GEORGE MODELSKI

333

If Conditions Evolution. it is now establishedthat complex systemsare both of the path-dependentand future-oriented, question then becomes: What are the optimumconditionsrequiredforthe occurrenceof evolution? Even though there is no need to invokethe postulateof progress,there is no of reason to believe thatevolutionis a randomprocess,a matter luckyaccident,or "manna from heaven."Ratherwe suppose thatin thepresenceofcertainconditions political evolution(or political learning)will tend to occur. For Charles Darwin, and certainenvirontheseconditionsincludedboth Malthusianpopulationgrowth mental conditions.According to Ervin Laszlo (1991:110), "Evolution is not an whenevercertain parametricrequirementshave accident but occurs necessarily diversity openness to energyflows, been fulfilled." These are forcomplex systems: of in components,catalytic cycles,and feedback.A chiefcharacteristic complex is systems heterogeneity. In be Whatmighttheserequirements forsocial systems? regardto global politics, policy and sufficient it has been argued (Modelski, 1987, 1995a) thatthe necessary to conditionsfor the rise, that is, selection,of one nation-state leadership in the have been politico-military global political systemin the past half-millennium and openness organizationof global reach, lead economy,a cooperativesociety, and responsivenessto global problems.These are (local) conditionsthat made it to for possible forsome nation-states get ahead ofothersin the competition global To statusin a heterogeneousworld system. the degree thatlong cycleshave been thesehave also been theconditions institutional of thedrivers politicalevolution, of development.Thus theyalso serveas guides to policymaking,and to institutionbuilding. More broadlyspeaking,theyare also conditionsthatapply to the evolutionof The nearer and worldinstitutions, to global politicalevolutionin the nextcentury. but the global system approximates(not uniformly at least in some of itsregions) matched generalized,as adequate politicalorganization, such conditions,suitably of world markethospitableto the by a world economic infrastructure a maturing in rise of new lead industrial sectors, the contextof an emergingglobal democratic and while respondingto global problems,the more likelyis political community, evolutionto proceed at a smoothand measured pace. Even more generallythese of in development all dimensions be might argued to be theconditions evolutionary of society. withsome care. All in all, thereis theseconditions to Thus itis important specify no denying the most basic postulate of this approach, that political evolution That also means thatthis is not an in occurs conditionsof complexity. necessarily of nor as attempt explainevolution thegeneration complexity, to seekto measure to of ratherto take social evolutionto be the property its progressby thatyardstick; that,as occasionsand conditionsdemand, maygrowmore or less complex systems It conditions. is theelucidation bestin certainspecifiable complex,but thatflourish thatis a first of theory. ofconditions priority theevolutionary hospitableto evolution What expectations does this set up in respect to our field? Most Questions. process; thatit is subject basically,thatglobal politicsis subjectto an evolutionary to evolution,and capable of evolution.Global politicsis not, and has neverbeen states since itsinception, frozenintoa stasisof a system populated by"preformed" Ratherit is the constantly of unclear originand uncertainfuture. changingglobal rates of political system the human species withsome partsof it evolvingat faster thanothers. Within distinct it, policylineagesor linesofdescentcan be distinguished tree thatcarry evolutionary the process.An evolutionary ofworldpoliticaldevelopmentmight suchconcepts;itwouldassertthecommondescentofpopulations clarify of policies, and theircommon originvia a branchingprocess (of differentiation).

334

Politics Paradigm Global for Evolutionary

as That is whywe mightviewthe evolutionof the entireworldsystem one process (Modelski, 1995b). biologistsregarded each individual species as having been Pre-evolutionary and productions, had been separately specieswereimmutable created"preformed"; posed the question whetherthe embryowas having originally created (Aristotle froman amorphous initial preformed,a miniatureindividual,or differentiated doctrinewas widelyheld until early in the nineteenth state). The preformation of centurywhen epigenesis (development involvinggradual differentiation an demonstrated Karl von Baer. It now by was entity) finally initially undifferentiated "stands to reason" that studentsof world politicscan no longer startwith "preformed" states as basic units, but must fine-tunetheir analysis in light of the the by variability politicalinstitutions refining conceptualequipment of long-term thathandles change. Mechanisms 3. Evolutionary of the The thirdpropositionproceeds towardconceptualizing working thisprocess whatare themechanisms; and replies,in termsthat over time.It asks howand why, are operators four-not analysis, thatthebasicevolutionary reachbeyondDarwinian only the Darwinian staples of selectionand variation,but also cooperation and amplification-whichjointly constitutea coherent set. The fourdo not operate learning haphazardlybut appear in sequencesthatextendovertimeand constitute processes (see Table 3). 10 so Selectionis, of course,the classicalDarwinianmechanism, much so thatsome discussionssuch as Elster's(1989) conveythe impressionthatit is the onlyevolugave equal billingto variation, mechanismthatcounts.But Darwinhimself tionary being thatwhichsets the entireprocess in motion;and WalterBagehot's ([1872], of 1948) early social and political interpretation Darwinismcertainlygave it a prominentplace. However, genetic mutationbeing also seen as an apparently random process, it oftenoccupied a less conspicuousrole, less subjectto control in is seen as thesourceofvariation social thanselection. Today, innovation generally is evolution,and itsindependentimportance nowbeginningto be widelyappreciated. "survival of concomitants, Emphasison selectionand whatsome sawas necessary one of the early and war,jarred manyand led to arguments, conflict the fittest," FactorinEvolution ([1914],1972), placing ones being PeterKropotkin'sMutualAid:A scheme. Robert Axelrod's (1984) cooperation at the center of the evolutionary but showedcooperationnot onlyto be possibleamong rationalegoists, simulations (Corning, 1983) have change. Studiesof synergy also to be subjectto evolutionary we pointed in the same direction.More broadly, mightregard "self-organization" attribute all evolutionary of as a fundamental processes,and regard it, as Stuart Kauffman(1995) has argued, as equal in importanceto selection.We therefore and fitness, conditionsof evolutionary regard cooperationas one of the necessary of survival. was in also implicit Darwin'sframework thenotionofselective advantage, Finally, the and experienced by "seor differential survival, reinforcement amplification lected" programs,as maintained,forexample, by Donald Campbell (1969:73) for "a duplicationor propagationof the "retention": mechanismforthe preservation,
positively selected variety." "Operant conditioning .
.

. is clearly an evolutionary

10 See earlier and as this problem-solving, on comments theanalogyofevolution learning; is learningviewed innovative betweenconditionsconduciveto evolution,discussed and not merelyas a cognitiveprocess.Note, too, the distinction and diachronic)of viewingthe in section2, and mechanismsof evolutionin section3, basicallytwoways(synchronic same phenomenon.

GEORGE MODELSKI Mechanismsof Global PoliticalProcesses TABLE 3. Evolutionary Process, Basic Unit RISE OF WORLD POWERS Traces the emergenceof carriersof global policies, i.a. Portugal(1420-1540), Dutch Republic,Britain, United States Each such learningcycleof some 120 yearsconsistsoffourphases of about 30 yearseach: Agenda-change Coalitioning Macrodecision Execution

335

Evolutionary Mechanisms (phases variation, of cooperation, selection, reinforcement)

GLOBAL INSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION Traces the emergenceofthe successiveparadigmaticsystems of rules,norms,and values in the global system: Proto-imperial 930-1420 (Eurasian transition period of "preconditions") Westphalian1420-1850 (WestEuropean period of global nucleus) Democratic 1850-2200 (post-WestEuropean period of global organization) Each such period of the global polityprocess (of some 500 years) consistsoffourphases, each a long cycle,e.g., in theWest European period: Informational (Portugal, discoveries) Social (Dutch Republic,integration) balance ofpower) Political(BritainI, states, Economic (BritainII, industrial, trade)

that to 1420-1850 means refer theemergence learning) Note:The datescited period, thus, Westphalian e.g., (or in was reached ca. by the"Westphalian" century, selected 1640-1740, maturity 1850, system, originating thefifteenth and is now with democratic system. competing theemerging

a mechanism... a mechanismof reinforcement whereby habit is selected 'within' takesplace wherethere a particular organism"(Van Parijs,1981:96). Reinforcement is capacityto learn,and is essentialto all learning,and so it is to social evolution. the these classicconceptions, presentaccount suggestsnot only By synthesizing thatthesocial evolutionary processutilizesall fourmechanisms and thatall fourare itsnecessary are components.1It also proposes thatthesefourmechanisms closely and meaningfully related to one another,and may be best understood if seen workingin sequences, starting withvariation,throughcooperationand selection, to reinforcement and retention.But even though theyare interdependent, their close relationship oftenobscuredby the factthateach fallswithinthe domain of is a different variation"belongs"to social scientific discipline.Verybroadlyspeaking, sociology;selection culturalstudies;cooperationto severalsocialsciences,including of raises problems of politics; and reinforcement, economics. "The attempted processes integrationof these diverse mechanismsin the studyof evolutionary (Andersen,1994:14). represents ambitiousand risky an synthesis" Evolution.The basic unitsof analysisin regardto global political GlobalPolitical empires,or worldorganizaprocesses,as previously argued, are not nation-states, (or tion,but persistent global politicalstrategies policyroutines).We regard forms
11A comparableconception thatofE. S. Andersen(1994:14), whodefines "evolutionary-economic" explanation an is "variety-creation," "selection," of and transmission," as one that"can be shownto include" mechanisms "preservation 'populations.'" and "segregation betweendifferent

336

Evolutionary Paradigm GlobalPolitics for

of global organization,such as world empire,or global leadership,as carriersof thatmayor maynotexperiencechange. tight clusters populations)of strategies (or Studentsof international politicsare conditionedto thinkof states,and nonstate actors, as the fundamentalunits of analysis.Such a view might serve as a first as approximation, and oftensuffices a shorthand expression.But on close analysis it cannotwithstand scrutiny. Organizationssuch as statesuse individuals, they but of act through policies.The interplay global policies constitutes global political the system.It is changes in these policies, changes that alter standard operating procedures,thatneed to be subjectedto the greatest scrutiny. The essentialsof an evolutionary learningprocess,or "calculus,"12 mightthereforebe formulated follows: as (a) The starting point is a population of global politicalstrategies policies) (or thatpersist(thatis,successfully reproducethemselves). "Persistence" reproduc(or tion) means the transmission a program,or code, or set of generatingrules,to of the next generationof strategies. Persistence strategies of need not be, in and of itself, problematic an evolutionary for theory, because itis accountedfor thebasic by inertiaof all social systems. (b) Over time,some ifnotmostofthesestrategies be reproducedin a routine will fashion,by copying;but otherswillundergo change, forexample, by experiment or chance mutation, willbe proposed as innovations policyentrepreneurs or in by response to demands forthe solutionof global problems.These are the sourcesof VARIATION thatintroduceinnovation intothepopulation of strategies. (c) In complex evolvingsystems, innovations engendercooperative,combiwill natorialor synergistic Corning,1983) effects. (cf. Strategies thatbecome the focus of effective alliances have a betterchance of surviving. Such COOPERATION, combinations,and coalitions are more probable in free societies,and are not random. (d) The politicaland social environment thispopulationofstrategies of (and not, in the first place, "nature,"or the "naturalenvironment") mightthenbe regarded as comprising selective factor mechanism or a thathelps todetermine which causally and whichpolicies shallbe substituted bynew partsof the programwillpersist, for programs.In global politics,SELECTION has been most directly product of the macrodecision,and in the past, decisions of global war; more generally,for all political systems, electionsare the selectivemechanismpar excellence. In global economics,there is the competitive of environment the world market;in global of community formation, contest ideologiesforthebuildingof"model societies." the (e) This completes the process of revisingthe code, and all that remains is REINFORCEMENT (thatis,reward, combinedwithpunishment nonselection), for such thatthe resultis a set of revisedstrategies thatare then diffused, mechavia nismsof amplification, in and transmitted a system inheritance, successive via of
generations of policies.

One example ofan evolutionary thesecharacteristics learningprocessexhibiting is thelong cycleofglobalpolitics(Modelski,1990, 1995a; Modelskiand Thompson, 1996; see also Table 2). This (learning)cycleis a nonlinearprocessthatcomprises fourphases, each one ofwhichmanifests, bringsto the fore,the operationof and one evolutionary The first thesephases is "Agenda-change," mechanism. of which "variation" through ontotheglobalagenda. "Coalitioning" bringspolicyinnovation manifests importance cooperativeactionin global affairs. the of "Macrodecision"is the selectionprocessof thatsystem; and "Execution"is an opportunity amplififor of and thebuildingof memory. cation,diffusion innovations,
12 Cf. also

Schmid's1987 (pp. 83-85) model.

GEORGE MODELSKI

337

of of But theturnover lead powersis no morethana mechanism worldinstitutional levelmaybe reckonedin fourlong cycles, change. Such changeat theglobalpolitical a each cycle (drivenby one global power,competingagainstothers)representing characteristic evolutionary phase of the global politicsprocess,and fourlong cycles evolution. The WestEuropeanperiod a constituting distinct periodof globalpolitical of global politics(fifteenth-nineteenth cf. century; Table 2), comprisedof the Portube of been formative guese,Dutch,and twoBritish longcycles, might thought as having and of both of the nucleusof the globalsystem of thebasic elements the nation-state law whatsome call theWestphalian defined rulesofinternational (forming system, by Each of these cyclesmightalso be regardedas havingactivatedsuccessive system). at thoseofvariation mechanisms thegloballevel:thePortuguese, evolutionary through in with the the discoveries; Dutch,thoseofcooperation creating, Britain, nucleusofthe the first global system; and the twoBritish cycles selecting new international system, and it industrial based on balance of powerstrategies, thenamplifying through and we of tradeexpansion.In otherwords, observe(as in Table 3) theworking the same mechanisms the scalesofbothone worldpowerrising global on to fourevolutionary in leadershipand theinstitutional complexoftheworldpolity formation. Hence we argue that evolutionary processes involvethe same mechanismsin time frames.Thatis, the process of changing different settingsand in different is a policies,or institutions, not homogeneousbut passes through number(four)of linkedto one distinct and sequenced phases ofa learningexperience,each strongly mechanisms.Such phases are (in one formor another) the of the evolutionary property all social evolutionary of processesbecause theyare all learningprocesses. is A unitof evolution, because evolutionary Periodiity. generation a keytemporal of and turnover processesare measuredin terms suchgenerations, generational seems The in are a basicsourceofperiodicity. measured generations question thoseofpolicies also be assumedthatstructural But linkedto or strategies. it might change is closely or of and of generational turnover, the comingand goingof generations organisms, is humans.If a generation reckonedas the replacement period,thatis, the interval thenin (human)socialsystems interval the whicha generation is during replacesitself, to of the order of twenty-five thirty years,and is the basic temporalunit of (social) evolutionary processes. Generations, moreover,are basic units of social learning processes.It is thesephases,and generational sequencesofphases,thatconstitute the for mostimportant material theanalysis policyand institutional of change. of The factof regularity the long cycle,and of related global processes,is now In quitewelldocumented.Whatare theexplanationsofthatregularity? and ofitself, it may not be altogethersurprising. According to Paul Davies (1984:57, 241), is "Periodic motion,or oscillation, perhaps the mostwidespreadexample of order in physics";indeed, "Physicalsystems whichdisplayexponentialbehaviorare also likelyto displayperiodic 'sinusoidal'behavior." The fact periodicity, oscillation, better or rateofevolutionary of or a still, constant thatcan be observed in coevolution. change, in turnaccounts forthe synchrony Both global politicsand the global economycan be called "oscillators" because, as as shown,theyexecuteperiodicbehavior.In physics, in biology,it is now takenfor tend towardsynchrony." thereare reasons to As grantedthat"coupled oscillators believethattheglobalpoliticaland economicsystems significantly are coupled, they their behavior. By extension the same might also be expected to synchronize argumentapplies to processesbywhichcooperationevolvesat the global level,that formation. is, the processesof global community All thisposes the questionofthe mechanismofsuch regularity, suggeststhe and of clock.A lead in thismatter provided is intriguing hypothesis a social-evolutionary molecular clocks (in by biologistswho recentlyfound evidence of evolutionary Dobzhansky,Ayala, Stebbins,and Valentine,1977:308-13; Ayala, 1984). Regular

338

Politics Evolutionary Paradigm Global for

processesover havebeen foundto pace evolutionary changes in molecularstructure verylong timespans (millionsofyears). rateofevolutionary change (fora givenprocess) is The assumptionofa constant crucial to this analysis. But it is not confinedonly to molecular biology. That employedwithgood resultsin the massive studyof the assumptionwas recently and his genetichistory and geographyofthe human speciesby Luca Cavalli-Sforza associates(1994:33). Whatis more,as theypointout, studiesof "geneticdistance," used to inferwhen two populations shared a common ancestor, show a close correspondence with, and are supported by the results of, work on linguistic derived) evolution.Indeed, linguistshave used the same (though independently clock" (Jones,1993:111) to unravelthe originsof the world's logic of a "linguistic languages, the pioneeringworkbeing thatof MorrisSwadesh (1971), who based of of (history the differentiation languages) on the "relatively "glottochronology" in of constantrhythm substitution" a basic vocabulary. be in clockmight stochastic character, governed A postulatedsocial-evolutionary of by a constantprobability a certainamount of mutation;at the level of social processes,whynot conceive of innovationsthat mightclusterin particulartime havebeen notedin theliterature innovations, have on and periods?Such bunchings be possibly linkedto theorganization, had so farno clear explanation.They might in time,of social processes. that suchchange.The determinaSuch a clockcould also be metronomic, is,timing and also highly tion of calendars has been basic to the emergenceof civilization, of as or the For instance, succession dynasties, in ancientEgypt, in China, politicized. was as history written political of have been clear markers worldtime.For centuries, in The morerecenttrends historiography, of regimes. history, as a story political and of enrichour understanding the past, whichemphasizesocial and economictrends, or effect politicalprocesses. of but do not negate the "time-keeper" "time-setter" servetotimeothers. suchas thelongcycle, might someevolutionary processes, Possibly processes and Nesting. Basic to this analysis is the insightthat evolutionary speeds, at more than one thoughat different mechanismsoperate simultaneously, argued (also Modelski,1987, 1995a), in regardto global politics, level.As previously one is theactorlevel,at which,in each long be twosuch levelsmight distinguished: cycle,a new actor has been selected forglobal leadership,or its equivalent.The other is the institutional level,wherea global polityprocess operates,each period of which representsthe cooperativesearch and amplifiedselectionof a revised the framework, adoption of new rules, and the reorderingof the institutional the That iswhyinTable 2 thethird(long cycle)column constraints defining system. West Eurothose of Eurasian Transition, showsthreeperiods of the global polity, the pean, and Post-WestEuropean, each ofwhichrepresents search fora new set kind.Table 3 showsthe ofbasic rules,and an evolutionary processofa restructured how each long mechanisms and in particular evolutionary nestingof thesefourfold cycle,oftheriseofone worldpower,is composed offourphases,and howfourlong evolutionat the global level.At cyclesin turnadd up to one period of institutional a yet more inclusivelevel, these threeperiods of the global politymighteach be mechanismsat the world the seen as exhibiting workingof the same evolutionary level as eras ofworldorder. system These two global levels are, of course, analytically distinct,13 theyare also but That related in a "nesting"fashionon a basis of self-similarity.14 is, substantially
13 We should note,too, that theworldlevel,global politics nestedin thethird, is Global, phase oftheworldsystem at two about 1000). The first have been called the Near Eastern(-3500 - -1200) and the Eurasian (-1200 process(starting - 1000) phases. 14 These are terms (Gleick,1987). borrowedfromchaos theory

GEORGE MODELSKI

339

in these processes are structurally similar,but differ scale and duration.What is more, the greater(institutional) process mightbe seen to enfoldthe smaller(long whilenesting whileon theotherhand, thesmaller, within largerprocess, the cycles), of mightalso be seen to drive it. It is the specification the calendar of events(or sequences of events) at the two levels of the global process that is the other top priority evolutionary of theory. does thisdiscussionplace Questions. Whatadditionalquestionsand expectations on the agenda of scholarship?First,that world politics is subject to learning changingit. Second, it tellsus processes of determinate structure thatare steadily thattime is a cardinal dimensionof thatfield,and thatno eventor policymaybe because eventsand policies have duration, considered in ignoranceof thatfactor to and sequential order, and call forcoordination.Attention such "temporality" of change, and the importance highlights constancy the and ubiquity evolutionary of synchronization. 4. TheCoevolution Structures ofGlobal We have shown so far that global politicalprocesses can be studied, in the first instance,as endogenous,but it is also clear thatthe conditionsthatfavorpolitical processesthatare exogenous to it. evolutionin turndepend on otherevolutionary Insofaras leadership in global politicsdepends in part on economic leadership, thenthelead conditionofa candidateeconomyis a function itsability produce of to global leading sectors(in originating K-wave);in turn,leading sectorexpansion a nestsin yetotherexogenousprocesses(thatis,in thesame example,in theevolution British of the entireworldeconomy,and oftheworldsystem). Concretely, political leadership ca. 1700-1850 was the productof the leading conditionof the British economy.The pictureis complex indeed. to "Coevolution"is a termreferring "diachronicchanges in twoor more interand Lumsden and Wilson (1981:367) have extended it acting objectsor systems"; of evolution.In populationsof to include the reciprocaleffects geneticand cultural in policies we mightspeak not onlyof coevolutionof strategies global politicsand of also partakes economics,butalso ofpolicylineages.The relationship coevolution based on self-similarity. the characterof nesting a for We have determined setofconditions thatare "necessary" selectionto global As the leadership,and thatwilldetermine shape ofglobal organization. just noted, in the case of the politico-strategic structure, relevantprocess is, of course, the endogenous; thatorganizationrisesas part of the long cycle.For the threeother recoursemustbe made to a set of conditionsthat,while also conditions,however, are evolutionary, exogenous to the global politicalprocess. These mightalso be called "interactioneffects" because studentsof internationalpolitical economy with economic of habituallylay much stresson the interaction politico-military factors. we In regard to the lead economy,as just mentioned, need to consultdevelopthatare likely and mentsin the global economicsystem, inquireintotheconditions to fosternew global economic sectorsin particular.The coevolution of global and opinion, shown in Table 2, is a schematic politics,economics, community, of noted, (descriptive) representation fourprocesses.The thirdcolumn,previously also showslong cyclesthatmarktherise(and implicitly thedecline) ofworldpowers and their antecedents in the Early Modern period. The fourthcolumn shows K-wavesthatare coordinatewithlong cyclesand thatchartthe rise and decline of and leading sectorsof the global economy;thesesectorshave been both industrial innovative shocks)in economic mercantile, representing spurts(or Schumpeterian centeredon thelead economy. Justas thelong cycle and commercialorganization,

340

Paradigm GlobalPolitics for Evolutionary

mightbe viewedas the mechanismpropellingthe global politicalprocess,K-waves jointlytheyactivatethe can be seen as the movingelementof the global economy; can international politicaleconomy(fulldocumentation be foundin Modelski and Thompson, 1996). thereis need to look intothe riseand decline of In regardto social organization, and the prospectsfor fortunes social movements, of "model societies,"the shifting the a global democraticcommunity; second column of Table 2 showsthe "model societies"that (each accountingforone period of thatprocess) have been succesof in for at sively prominent cumulating theformation a community the global level, the be lineage. might called thedemocratic and have thusconstituted outlineofwhat Each entryalso reports the "opposition," social forces in resistance to which emerged the successivemembers of the democraticlineage, viewed initiallyas This processis in effect ofglobal community one formation, commuexperiments. or nitybeing defined as a framework patternof enduring cooperation. 5 It is formation because the global community thatis yetto emerge maybe community societiesof recent by expected to do so around a nucleusformed the experimental be lineage might traced;equallyimportant, experience,amongwhoma democratic this communityformationis also coordinate with the political and economic processes just discussed.Atthemostgenerallevel,theevolutionoftheentireglobal systemappears to be paced (as shown in the firstcolumn) by changes in the conceptual and intellectualcurrentsthat shape the media, global opinion and education. as Table 2 therefore depictsglobal politicsof thepast millennium a coevolutionworldpowers,interacting withparallel developaryprocess activated successive by and fundamental mentsin economyand community, also displaying change at the level. The elementsof a global system arose in Sung China afterthe institutional tenthcentury, generatedtheMongols' attempt worldempirein theEurasian and at context.As thatattempt failed,the process thenmoved,fromsmallbeginningsof trial, error, and experiment,throughthe consolidation of a global nucleus in WesternEurope, towarda conditionof greaterworld organizationin its current Post-WestEuropean period. In turn,that process is shown to be supported,at in timescales,by relatedmovements the global economy, different symmetric but In of and in the structure the global community. these respectsit also suggests explanations for the collapse of Communism,and of the Soviet bloc in Eastern Europe and in Russia in 1989-91. So much for coevolution of global structural processes. For an even more mustalso be made to developmentsat regional and complete picture,reference national levels. All in all, a complex task,which opens broad and ever-widening be vistasforevolutionary But it might renderedmore tractable because the theory. conditionshospitable to evolution(specifiedin section 2 above) that define and characterize maybe regardedas the initialproxiesforthesemore complex systems wide rangingramifications. about thenormalcourse changeexpectations Questions. How does thisdiscussion of global politics?It makes it clear thatstructural change at the global level is not of confinedto global politicsbut needs to be thought as in close coordinationwith albeitat different and global economics,community, opinion,all ofthemchanging, No "ingredients." longer is it possible to subsume such rates,and withdifferent efforts under the umbrellaof "international politicaleconomy"alone. Transition and crisesin theseveralprocessessynchronize, need tobe tackledcomprehensively.

15 In regardto responsiveness global problems, understood, particular processes in the muchremainsto be better to and worldvalues. thatshape global opinion,culture,

GEORGEMODELSKI

341

Questions also arise that reach beyond global politics.This entire discussion thatframework might implicitly proposes that,in itsbasics and mutatismutandis, and society, also hold forglobal evolutionary processesin therealmoftheeconomy, but opinion. Not in regard to all the problemsthatmightbe encountered, specificharacter. callyto those of long-rangeimportand transformational Hence certaingeneral statements about global politicsmightalso be relevant for othersocial sciencesand mightbe seen as basic: thatforpurposes of evolutionary inquiry, basic unit of analysisis the human species in itspoliticalinteractions; the and as thatglobal politics, well as global economy, community, opinion,all evolve, in those involving variation,selection, and flourish certainspecifiable conditions, thatthe mechanismsof thatevolutionare (fourcooperation,and amplification; and thatat the global level phased) learningprocessesof determinate periodicity; coevolvethrough coactionand synchronization. these processessystematically
A Research Program

So much for the "hard core" (in the Lakatosian sense) of the social evolutionary researchprogramin regardto globalpolitics.It is actuatedbytheconceptionofthe world systemas subject to evolutionary process, in particularin regard to world politics,and one that is drivenby the long cycleunderstood as a (phased, and also periodic) selectionprocess. This is the heart of the "evolutionary therefore analogy" (see also Pringle,1951). "Analogiesare, of course,not sourcesof proof, but sourcesof hypotheses" (Campbell, 1969:73). testable,but predictions The "hard core" of the program may not be directly generated fromwithinit may be, and have given rise to a sustained research program. It began with a demonstrationof the existence of long cycles as historical-structural regularitiesin worldpolitics(Thompson, 1988). The theory predicted that at the close of each of the past fiveglobal wars one power would emerge with a monopoly of sea power, a key element in the politico-strategic organization forglobal reach thatis a necessarycondition of global leadership. Research and measurement has confirmed that prediction (Modelski and work confirmedthat preThompson, 1988). Other research and documentary dictionwithqualitativematerial,and yetotherworkrelated to developmentsat the regional level. of The nextstagewas thesearchforexplanation,and theadvancement thethesis thatlong cycles of werean instance an evolutionary process(Modelski,1990, 1995a). Such workhas shownthatthe rise ofworldpowersmaybe understoodas a phased analogy,"and flourishing best learningprocess,as predictedby the "evolutionary in conditionsthatmaybe interpreted thosefavoring as evolution. thatthe global politicalprocess A new stagewas enteredwiththe demonstration withthe evolutionof the global economy (drivenby long cycles)is synchronous thatcoevolution (Modelski and Thompson, 1996). There are groundsforthinking of a similarkind can be shownwiththe global community process (as proposed in of as the second columnofTable 2), and evolution the global system a whole (in the first column).Anotherchallengeforthe evolutionary paradigmis the construction of a calendar of global politicsforthe twenty-first century. References
New Contributions. York: Pinter. Economics: Post-Schumpeterian ANDERSEN,E. S. (1994) Evolutionary of New York: Basic Books. AXELROD, R. (1984) TheEvolution Cooperation. A Menlo Park,CA: BenjaminCummings. Genetics: Primer. and AYALA, J. (1982) Population Evolutionary F. of on of Application thePrinciples Natural and Politics, Thoughts the or BAGEHOT,W. [1872], (1948) Physics A. New York:Alfred Knopf. to Society. Selection Inheritance Political and

342

Paradigm GlobalPolitics for Evolutionary

A New Societal Evolution. of Beverly CA:SagePublications. Hills, BOULDING,K. E. (1981)Ecodynamics: Theory Evolution.GeneralSystems CAMPBELL,D. T. (1969) Variationand SelectiveRetentionin Socio-cultural
University Press. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Evolution. York:McGraw-Hill. New P. Synergism Hypothesis:A ofProgressive Theory CORNING, A. (1983)The the into Future Economics. Technical Report 533. no. Putting Past the of DAVID, A. (1988)Path P. Dependence: Calif. for Studiesin the Social Sciences,Stanford, Institute Mathematical New DAVIES, (1984) Superforce. York: Simon and Schuster. P. Blind Watchmaker. York: W. Norton. New W. DAWKINS, (1987)The R. G. San ANDJ. W. VALENTINE(1977) Evolution. Francisco:W. H. DOBZHANSKY, F. J.AYALA, L. STEBBINS, T., Freeman. andBolts the Press. Sciences. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity ELSTER,J.(1989) Nuts for Social and Jaguar. York: H. Freeman. New W. M. GELL-MANN, (1994)The Quark the and London:Heinemann. GINSBERG,M. (1961)Evolution Progress. a Science. York:Penguin. New GLEICK,J. (1987)Chaos: Making New Clarendon Press. Evolution. Oxford: C. HALLPIKE, R. (1986)The PrinciplesSocial of Scientific American, February. HORGAN,J.(1994) "ParticleMetaphysics." The 3rd Synthesis. ed. New York: HafnerPress. HUXLEY,J.[1942], (1974) Evolution: Modern New JONES, (1993)The Language Genes. York:AnchorPress. of S. in Universe: Search the The andComplexity. for Laws Self-Organization of KAUFFMAN,A. (1995)AtHome the S. Press. New York: OxfordUniversity Aid: in New Press. KROPOTKIN, A. [1914], P. (1972)Mutual A Factor Evolution. York: New York University the World. Philadelphia: Gordonand Understanding Changing LASZLO, (1991) The E. AgeofBifurcation: Breach. ofthe Sciences, Encyclopedia Social LEWONTIN, C. (1968) "The Concept of Evolution."In International R. vol. 5. New York: Macmillan. The Process. Cambridge, Mind,and Culture: Coevolutionary LUMSDEN,C. J.,ANDE. 0. WILSON (1981) Genes, Press. MA: Harvard University in London:Macmillan. Politics. G. MODELSKI, (1987)Long Cycles World Winter. Learning?International Organization, MODELSKI, G. (1990) Is WorldPoliticsEvolutionary Journalof MODELSKI, G. (1995a) From Leadership to Organization:The Evolutionof Global Politics. of The Social Science of Long-term Change, University Lund, March. History: Politics W. in 1494-1993. London:Macmillan. MODELSKI, AND R. THOMPSON G., (1988)Seapower Global Sectors World and Powers: Co-evolution The ofGlobal MODELSKI, G.,AND W. R. THOMPSON (1996)Leading Columbia: University South Carolina Press. of Economics Politics. and MA: Evolutionary of TheoryEconomic Change. Cambridge, Belknap NELSON, ANDS.G. WINTER R., (1982)An Press. Institutional and New Change Economic Performance. York: Cambridge NORTH,D. (1990) Institutions, Press. University Paths the New Theory: into Future. York:JohnWiley. POLLARD, W., ED. (1984)Evolutionary J. 3(3):174-214. PRINGLE,J.W. S. (1951) On the Parallel BetweenEvolutionand Learning.Behaviour in International System. RICHARDS, (1993) A ChaoticModel ofPowerConcentration theInternational D.
MODELSKI, G. (1995b) World SystemEvolution.Paper prepared forthe Conferenceon World System

(1994) CAVALLI-SFORZA, L., P. MENOZZI, AND A. PIAzZA L.

14:69-85.

TheHistory GeographyHuman and of Genes.

Research World Systems 1(7).

A Critical Evolutionism: MA: S. History. Cambridge, Blackwell. SANDERSON, (1991) Social SCHMID, M. (1987) "CollectiveActionand the Selection of Rules: Some Notes on the Evolutionary in edited by M. Schmidand F. M. Theory SocialScience, Paradigmin Social Theory."In Evolutionary Wuketits. Dordrecht,Holland: D. Reidel. In New edited by E. Laszlo, Evolutionary Paradigm, SCHULL, J. (1991) "Evolutionand Intelligence." The Gordon and Breach. pp. 55-76. Amsterdam: 3rd H. of Sociology. ed. 3 vols. New York: Appleton. SPENCER, [1885], (1910) The Principles Political Speculative, 1. NewYork: and vol. H. Appleton. SPENCER, (1910) Essays: Scientific, and Aldine. M. of Language. Chicago: SWADESH, (1971) The Origin Diversification to War:Historical-Structural W. Politics. Columbia: Approaches World THOMPSON, R. (1988) On Global of University South Carolina Press. in Social VANPARIJS, (1981) Evolutionary Sciences. London: P. Tavistock. Explanationthe
WESSON, R.

Studies Quarterly 37(1):55-72.

Natural Selection. MA: Cambridge, MIT Press. (1991) Beyond