Arms Debates - a 'Positional' Interpretation

Fredrik Hoffmann
Additional contact information
Fredrik Hoffmann: International Peace Research Institute, Oslo

Journal of Peace Research, 1970, vol. 7, issue 3, 219-228

Abstract: This article is based on debates on security problems in four different parliamentary as semblies. (La Chambre des Députés, 1903, the German Reichstag, 1911, the British Parliament, 1927, and the US Senate 1963)The original aim of the project was to register what changes occur in the structures of argumentation in these debates. The main finding, however, is that the principal arguments are the same in all four debates in spite of great differences in the outside objective situation. The 'radicals' and the 'conservatives' each use one and the same set of arguments in all four debates. This leads to the conclusion that the debaters' views on security policy are not decided by objective factors. Because of the ambiguity of this kind of problem, basic political attitudes structure the debaters' perceptions of 'reality'.Finally, the structures of argumentation in the debates are explained by concepts developed in an article by Samuel Huntington.

Date: 1970
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/7/3/219.abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:joupea:v:7:y:1970:i:3:p:219-228

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Peace Research from Peace Research Institute Oslo
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().