Never at War: Why Democracies Will Not Fight One Another [Paperback]

Dr. Spencer R. Weart (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: April 1, 2000

This lively survey of the history of conflict between democracies reveals a remarkable-and tremendously important-finding: fully democratic nations have never made war on other democracies. Furthermore, historian Spencer R. Weart concludes in this thought-provoking book, they probably never will. Building his argument on some forty case studies ranging through history from ancient Athens to Renaissance Italy to modern America, the author analyzes for the first time every instance in which democracies or regimes like democracies have confronted each other with military force. Weart establishes a consistent set of definitions of democracy and other key terms, then draws on an array of international sources to demonstrate the absence of war among states of a particular democratic type. His survey also reveals the new and unexpected finding of a still broader zone of peace among oligarchic republics, even though there are more of such minority-controlled governments than democracies in history. In addition, Weart discovers that peaceful leagues and confederations-the converse of war-endure only when member states are democracies or oligarchies. With the help of related findings in political science, anthropology, and social psychology, the author explores how the political culture of democratic leaders prevents them from warring against others who are recognized as fellow democrats and how certain beliefs and behaviors lead to peace or war. Weart identifies danger points for democracies, and he offers crucial, practical information to help safeguard peace in the future.

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

In this seminal work, historian Spencer Weart analyzes every recorded instance of conflict among democracies and comes to a remarkable conclusion: democratic republics have never gone to war against one another. Though he is not the first to present this theory of "democratic peace," the depth and breadth of his research sets Never at War apart as a work of singular importance.

To present as scientific a study as possible, Weart meticulously defines various forms of government in order to present a working model of democracy. He defines a republic as a community in which political decisions are made by citizens with equal rights, then divides republics into two camps: democracies, in which at least two-thirds of adult males can make political decisions, and oligarchies, in which one-third or fewer males hold political rights. Working within these parameters, he finds that "republics and only republics have tended to form durable, peaceful leagues." Taking his point further, he asks, "When states avoid war so thoroughly, can that be a mere accident, or is there some deeper reason? If a general reason exists then we may already have at hand, in peaceful democratic regions like Western Europe, the blueprint for a solution to the problem of war." Such a solution is both his hope and his conviction.

As he illustrates with copious historical examples, governments tend to transfer their internal political structure outward, so that they deal with other nations as if they were operating from a similar set of rules--a kind of diplomatic "do unto others" approach. When republics are dealing with one another, negotiation and compromise are used instead of war. When two different political regimes are in conflict, however, no similar ground rules apply, and war becomes much more likely. To back up such claims, he relies on a wealth of evidence that stretches from ancient Greece through Renaissance Italy and into the mid-1990s, including an appendix that details nearly every meaningful skirmish between "approximately republican regimes" over the past two millennia. Impressive in scope and powerfully convincing, Never at War is an effective tool for waging peace. --Shawn Carkonen --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal

One of our cherished mythologies is that democracies do not fight each other. Weart, director of the Center for the History of Physics at the American Insitute of Physics and author most recently of Nuclear Fear: A History of Images (LJ 5/1/88), has examined hundreds of battles over the centuries between republics, oligarchies, democracies, and autocracies to show that, indeed, democracies do not seem to attack one another. The reason, Weart proposes, turns out to be rather simple: democratic leaders are not inclined to war on other nations whose citizenry hold the same basic ideals and principles as they. The author concludes that this is not the case with republics or with nations ruled by autocracies or dictators. Since the enemy is easier to designate as the "other," war more readily transpires. Weart bases his thesis on an enormous amount of research in historical, sociological, anthropological, and political science sources. He mixes the methodologies of all these disciplines to arrive at his well-argued conclusions. A remarkable piece of scholarship; for all large collections and for those specializing in war and peace studies.?Edward Goedeken, Iowa State Univ. Lib., Ames
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 432 pages
• Publisher: Yale University Press (April 1, 2000)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0300082983
• ISBN-13: 978-0300082982
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6.1 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,458,279 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Thoughtful: 4.5 stars, February 18, 2007

By 

R. Albin (Ann Arbor, Michigan United States) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Never at War: Why Democracies Will Not Fight One Another (Paperback)

This is a well written and thoughtful analysis of the "democratic peace theory" argument. A number of political scientists have argued that one of the few empirically established truths of international relations is that democracies do not war on each other. This idea was actually suggested by the philosopher Kant approximately 2 centuries ago, a prediction that has turned out to be somewhat surprisingly correct. Weart opens by reviewing the political science literature on the democratic peace theory, concluding that it is valid. Most of the book is devoted to exploring why this phenomenon exists. Weart's conclusion is that the domestic political culture of a nation's leadership is responsible for its approach to international relations. Republican states, especially established democracies, have cultures of compromise, accomodation, and respect for dissenting views. These cultural traits carry over into international affairs. Conversely, authoritarian states, whose leadership usually arises in an atmosphere of ruthless competition and repression, will tend towards more aggressive and inflexible modes of international conduct. This brief summary doesn't do justice to Weart's systematic presentation of his argument, which is based on an unusually thorough review of the historical and relevant political science literature. Weart points to some unexpected and predictable consequences of his formulation. For example, in addition to finding that democracies don't war with each other, he finds as well that oligarchic republics, which have some of the same political culture as democracies also have a low rate of mutual warfare. Also, democracies and oligarchic republics also have a tendency to form unusually successful/stable alliances, in contrast to authoritarian states. Weart is careful to specify that he is not arguing that democracies are intrinsically peaceful, pointing in particular to a number of examples from American history. Weart's last chapter, which is on spreading democracy, turns out to be quite topical. Given the advantages of peace to democratic states, he discusses ways in which democracy can be spread. He makes a good argument that direct military intervention is usually a relatively poor way of spreading democracy. Weart's book was published in 1999, well before the current Iraq mess.
My only criticism is that I wish Weart had presented some of his data in tabular or numerical form.