This article integrates normative theoretical analysis into accounts of international order by connecting the study of international practice to debates about the nature and moral purpose of states’ social association. Combining English School and social practice theory with insights from scholarship on colonialism, race, and empire, we conceptualize international order as a dynamic, contested, but often stable and durable, set of patterns of practice and show how they set ethical reference points and privilege certain claims over others in relation to legitimate agency and morally appropriate conduct. To allow for a grounded normative analysis of global ordering practices, we connect actors’ capacity to exercise creative normative agency to debates about legitimate membership and morally appropriate conduct in international society. We highlight the normative significance of historical context for the study of international practices and illustrate our theoretical arguments with examples from various ordering practices, including international law, war, diplomacy, and economic practice, where actors frequently draw on foundational values to construct normative claims about inclusion and exclusion. At the same time, agents’ creative capacity to alter existing and create new rights and obligations has transformed our thinking, acting, and arguing about the nature and moral purpose of world order.

中文翻译：

---

全球秩序实践的规范性

本文通过将国际实践研究与关于国家社会联合的性质和道德目的的辩论联系起来，将规范性理论分析整合到国际秩序的解释中。将英国学派和社会实践理论与对殖民主义、种族和帝国的学术见解相结合，我们将国际秩序概念化为动态的、有争议的，但通常是稳定和持久的实践模式集，并展示它们如何设定道德参考点和特权与合法机构和道德上适当的行为有关的对他人的某些要求。为了允许对全球秩序实践进行有根据的规范分析，我们将行为者行使创造性规范机构的能力与关于国际社会中合法成员资格和道德上适当行为的辩论联系起来。我们强调历史背景对于国际实践研究的规范意义，并通过各种秩序实践的例子来说明我们的理论论点，包括国际法、战争、外交和经济实践，在这些实践中，行为者经常利用基本价值观来构建规范性主张包容和排斥。与此同时，代理人改变现有权利和义务并创造新权利和义务的创造性能力已经改变了我们对世界秩序的性质和道德目的的思考、行动和争论。参与者经常利用基本价值观来构建关于包容和排斥的规范性主张。与此同时，代理人改变现有权利和义务并创造新权利和义务的创造性能力已经改变了我们对世界秩序的性质和道德目的的思考、行动和争论。参与者经常利用基本价值观来构建关于包容和排斥的规范性主张。与此同时，代理人改变现有权利和义务并创造新权利和义务的创造性能力已经改变了我们对世界秩序的性质和道德目的的思考、行动和争论。