IR has failed to develop a consistent and coherent conceptualization of revisionism. Conceptual stretching, false comparison, and “status quo biases” pervade the literature. In order to overcome these problems, the article develops a novel typology of revisionism that differentiates revisionist states by the scope of their revisionist aims as well and the means they are willing to use to achieve them. This typology goes beyond recent typologies, which focus on revisionist aims but neglect the important question of means, thereby failing to provide a complete picture of the kind of challenge any particular revisionist poses to peace and stability. The typology is used to classify contemporary Russia, whose challenge comes not from its modest revisionist aims, but from the extreme means it is prepared to use to realize these goals.

IR 未能形成一致和连贯的修正主义概念。概念延伸、错误比较和“现状偏见”充斥着文献。为了克服这些问题，本文提出了一种新的修正主义类型学，它根据修正主义目标的范围以及它们愿意用来实现这些目标的手段来区分修正主义国家。这种类型学超越了最近的类型学，后者侧重于修正主义的目标，而忽略了重要的手段问题，因此无法全面描述任何特定修正主义对和平与稳定构成的挑战。类型学被用来对当代俄罗斯进行分类，它的挑战不是来自其温和的修正主义目标，而是来自它准备用来实现这些目标的极端手段。