ABSTRACT
The political argument against disarmament would remain strong and the military would continue to heavily influence security policy. While recognising the influence of domestic political structure on the nature of America's security dilemma, a more complete picture should also consider the identity of the intellectual communities competing for political significance. E. Adler and M. Barnett draw a distinction between tightly-coupled and loosely-coupled security communities. The dependable expectation of peaceful change exists across both kinds of communities. If a "security community" between states is responsive only to particular interests within and across states, the neglected are likely to oppose those norms that perpetuate the intersubjective understandings between state elites. For New Thinkers the only way to achieve security was to positively identify with the other 'such that the other is seen as a cognitive extension of the self rather than independent'. New Thinking, in other words, sought to reform the particularist and exclusivist identities of the Superpowers.
