Politics & International Relations
Realism and Globalisation
Realism in the context of globalization refers to the perspective that states are the primary actors in international relations and that their behavior is driven by self-interest and power. Globalization, on the other hand, refers to the increasing interconnectedness of the world through economic, political, and cultural processes. Realist scholars often analyze globalization through the lens of power dynamics and state competition.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
12 Key excerpts on "Realism and Globalisation"
- S. Burchill(Author)
- 2005(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
31 2 Conventional Perspectives: Realist Approaches He who would do good to another must do it in Minute Par- ticulars. General Good is the plea of the scoundral, hypocrite and flatterer. (William Blake, Jerusalem) To say that a policy or practice is in the interests of an individual or group is to assert both that the recipient would somehow benefit from it and that there is therefore a reason in support of enacting that policy ... as it is used in our society, ‘interest’ is one of those concepts that connects descriptive and explanatory statements to normative judgement. (William Connolly, The Terms of Political Discourse) Realism is widely regarded as the most influential theoretical tradition in International Relations, even by its harshest critics. Its ancient philosophical heritage, its powerful and original critique of liberal inter- nationalism, together with its influence on the practice of international diplomacy have secured it an important, if no longer dominant position in the discipline. No other theory has given as much form and structure to the study of international politics, especially to the sub-fields of Security Studies and International Political Economy (see Donnelly 2000). As its name implies, realism seeks to describe and explain the world of international politics as it is, rather than how we might like it to be. Accordingly, the world is revealed to realists as a dangerous and insecure place, where violence is regrettable but endemic. In their accounts of the conflictual nature of international politics, realists give high priority to the nation-state in their considerations, acknowledging it as the supreme political authority in the world. Explaining the 32 The National Interest in International Relations Theory frequent violent behaviour of nation-states can only be done, however, by focusing on the role of power and the importance of the most power- ful – the Great Powers.
- W. Nester(Author)
- 2010(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
THEORIES AND REALITIES: WEALTH AND POWER 9 outright contradictory. The study and practice of politics is as much an art as a science and can be accurately analyzed only by an interdisciplinary or humanities approach that explores all its many dimensions, some of which can be measured and most of which can be only interpreted by other appropriate means. Depending on just what is being explored, a proper study might include not just varying contributions from all the overlap- ping social sciences—political science, economics, psychology, sociology, and history, but also from such natural sciences as geography, geology, and climatology. Humanism thus represents the true empirical and objec- tive paradigm or approach for the study of politics. Until the twentieth century most of those who wrote about international relations reflected a perspective known as “realist theory.” 6 In Western civilization, realism emerged at least as far back as Thucydides’ study of the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BC). Realists share basic assumptions about the behavior of humans and states, and thus the characteristics of the interstate system in which they are embedded. The only essential force in international relations is the unequal distribution of power among states, and the constant conflict as each state strives to increase its power at the expense of others. In an anarchical world, every state is governed by the same interest—survival—that depends on amassing as much power as possible to defend oneself or, ideally, conquer others. States are trapped in a “security dilemma” as the efforts each makes to strengthen itself at once threaten others. Tensions rise and frequently end in war. Why are international relations like that? According to “classic” real- ists like Thucydides, Nicolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and Hans Morgenthau, the nature of sovereign states reflects the humans who com- pose them.
eBook - PDF- Craig A. Snyder(Author)
- 2011(Publication Date)
- Red Globe Press(Publisher)
This chapter will focus on realism as an academic approach to under-standing international politics. Although scholarship in security studies has often been influenced by philosophical realism, most of the con-temporary debates over the theory and practice of international politics have revolved around issues raised by academic realist theories. Realism is a general academic approach to international politics, not a single, unified theory. Critics and proponents of realism often fail to recognize that realism is a family of many related theories. Although realist theories of international politics differ, most realists share the following core beliefs about the nature of international politics (for other discussions of the elements and assumptions of realism see Keohane, 1986a: 7–16; Gilpin, 1986: 304–5; Mearsheimer, 1994–95: 10–12; Walt, 2002: 199–200). First, realists believe that states are the most important actors in international politics. They therefore, focus on explaining the behaviour of states and tend to pay less attention to individuals and transnational actors such as corporations and multina-tional organizations. Second, realists regard anarchy – the absence of any common sovereign – as the distinguishing feature of international life. Without a central authority to enforce agreements or to guarantee Realism and Security Studies 19 security, states must rely on their own means to protect their interests. The corollary of the assumed existence of an anarchic system is thus the necessity for states to use self-help measures, including force, to protect their interests. Third, realists assume that states seek to maxi-mize their power or their security. Some realists focus on power as an end in itself, whereas others regard it as a means to security. Hans Morgenthau (1948) is the leading example of a realist who holds that states seek power. Kenneth Waltz (1988: 40–1) exemplifies the view that power is only a means to the end of security.
eBook - PDF- Richard Devetak, Jim George, Sarah Percy(Authors)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
The state We have seen that realism, as a theory of international politics, is concerned principally with states as power – and security – maximising actors in a context of international anarchy. States are the fundamental units of organised, hierarchical power, and their relations dominate world politics (see Chapter 11 ). It is possible to identify three key features of the state as understood by realism. First, states possess sovereignty , the supreme authority to make and enforce laws. Second, states govern by exercising a monopoly over both internal and external instruments of legitimate violence (embodied in the police and armed forces respectively). Third, these sovereign organisations are territorial, partitioning the world by imposing both material and immaterial barriers between people (namely, borders and citizenship respectively). Other existing organisations – international (e.g. United Nations), supranational (e.g. European Union), transnational (e.g. NGOs) – perform important roles but are always ultimately subordinate to states – or at least to the most powerful among them. International law occupies an analogous condition of subordination, being the product of the contingent will and actual practice of the states (see Chapter 18 ). Individuals and other non-state actors (e.g. activists, transnational corporations) without the state’s support have reduced political space to conduct their trans-border activities in international relations (see Chapter 23 ). States perform essential political, social and economic functions for all other actors in world politics, and no other organisation appears today as a possible competitor (Spruyt 1994 ). In particular, most powerful states make the rules and maintain the institutions that shape international life, including its economic and cultural dimensions, popularly known as ‘globalisation’ (Waltz 1999 ).
No longer available |Learn moreInternational Politics
Power and Purpose in Global Affairs
- D'Anieri, Paul D'Anieri(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
72 INTERNATIONAL POLITICS: Power and Purpose in Global Affairs Military capability, economic capacity, and prestige or cultural power are important components. Combining all of these factors in a way that allows researchers to deter-mine which countries are more powerful than others is impossible, yet realist analysis relies on the ability to do so. Realism also tends to ignore other manifestations of power, such as institutional power, “soft” power, structural power, and collaborative power (see Chapter 1). LIBERALISM Political liberalism arose in the eighteenth century and took a practical form when it inspired the American Revolution and was embodied in the U.S. Constitution. Liberal theory took hold more slowly in the international realm than in the United States, but its influence has gradually increased over time. Both international and domestic liberalism were responses to the problem of anarchy that had been set out by theorists such as Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes argued that in order to solve the problem of domestic anarchy, a powerful monarch, the “Leviathan,” was necessary. In the international realm, with a single international “monarch” (a global empire) or world government viewed as impossible, realists argue that anarchy, with all its consequences, is unavoidable. Although liberal theories vary considerably, all share a rejection of the realist notion that the consequences of anarchy cannot be mitigated. Liberal domestic theory centers on the rights (liberties) of the individual. The politi-cal theorist John Locke and later liberals argued, contrary to Hobbes, that individuals could freely join together to form governments that would protect them from anarchy without resorting to authoritarianism. The limitation of state power and the guarantee of the rights of individuals are still the core of liberalism (which, in contemporary usage, is often simply called democracy ).
eBook - PDF- Gerald F Gaus, Chandran Kukathas, Gerald F Gaus, Chandran Kukathas(Authors)
- 2004(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications Ltd(Publisher)
From being one of the most staid of academic dis-ciplines, conservatively locked into a position that specifically and explicitly undervalued speculative thought, international relations has become one of the most open-minded fields in the modern acad-emy. Indeed, it could well be argued, it has become rather too open-minded: the rigidity of the old dis-cipline has been replaced by an ‘anything goes’ attitude that, while undoubtedly entertaining, is perhaps a little too indiscriminate in its affection for the new. Most of the rest of this chapter will be devoted to ‘international political theory’, focusing on both analytical theory and, in much less detail, constructivist and late modern thought; but first some attention will be given to unreconstructed international relations theory, and in particular to realism. REALISM AND POLITICAL THEORY The genealogy of realist international relations theory is interesting, and somewhat counter-intuitive. Realists take the state to be the key inter-national actor, assume that states pursue interests defined in terms of power and, thus, hypothesize a world which can be characterized as a ‘struggle for power and peace’, the subtitle of Hans J. Morgenthau’s influential Politics among Nations (1948). Presented with this thumbnail sketch, a political theorist might reasonably assume this doc-trine to be connected with nineteenth-century German power politics of the school of Heinrich von Treitschke or, perhaps, at a higher level of sophistication, with the twentieth-century, right-wing, political philosopher and legal theorist Carl Schmitt, whose ‘friend–enemy’ distinction seem highly relevant here (Schmitt, 1996; Treitschke, 2002). As will become apparent, nothing could be further from the truth. Augustinian Realism Classic American realism emerged in the 1930s and 1940s.
No longer available |Learn more- (Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Learning Press(Publisher)
______________________________ WORLD TECHNOLOGIES ______________________________ Chapter- 2 Positivist Theories of International Relations Realism in international relations theory Niccolò Machiavelli's work The Prince is an antecedent to realist thinking ______________________________ WORLD TECHNOLOGIES ______________________________ Realism in international relations theory is one of the dominant schools of thinking within the international relations discipline. Realism or political realism prioritizes national interest and security over ideology, moral concerns and social reconstructions. This term is often synonymous with power politics. Common assumptions Realist theories share the following key assumptions: • The international system was developed a long time ago. • The international system is in a constant state of anarchy. There is no actor above states capable of regulating their interactions; states must arrive at relations with other states on their own, rather than it being dictated to them by some higher controlling entity. • In pursuit of national security, states strive to attain as many resources as possible. • States are rational unitary actors each moving towards their own national interest. There is a general distrust of long-term cooperation or alliance. • The overriding 'national interest' of each state is its national security and survival. • Relations between states are determined by their levels of power derived primarily from their military and economic capabilities. • The interjection of morality and values into international relations causes reckless commitments, diplomatic rigidity, and the escalation of conflict. • Sovereign states are the principal actors in the international system and special attention is afforded to large powers as they have the most influence on the international stage.
eBook - PDFMilitarist Peace in South America
Conditions for War and Peace
- F. Martín(Author)
- 2006(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
CHAPTER 2 POLITICAL REALISM: PEACE THROUGH POWER? P olitical realism and its contemporary derivative, neorealism, constitute one of the most influential analytical traditions in world politics. E. H. Carr places the origin of this school of thought “far behind utopianism and by way of reaction from it.” He affirms, nonetheless, that “the thesis that ‘justice is the right of the stronger’ was, indeed, familiar in the Hellenic world.” 1 While Carr traces the inception of realist ideas to ancient Greece, Robert Gilpin is more specific and asserts that “the classic history of Thucydides is as meaningful a guide to the behavior of states today as when it was written in the fifth century B.C.” 2 Such expressions are common among many contemporary realists who claim that Thucydides’s analysis of the Peloponnesian War and his focus on the concept of relative power are fundamen- tal pillars of political realism. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that one of realism’s primary concerns has been the investigation of the causes of war and peace in interstate relations. Given the focus of this book, it will evaluate the causal relationship between the most relevant realist propositions and the prevalence of peace in South America. Various realist strands often yield contradictory propositions on the causes of war and peace. Nevertheless, the decision has been made to present realism in consistent and parsimonious terms, because it is treated frequently that way in the international relations literature. Clearly, unless such contradictions are identified and tested against specific cases, there cannot be much theoretical progress in that part of the field of International Relations, nor can realism be called a paradigm. The alternative to the approach taken in this study is to remain operating according to a number of loosely connected propositions that yield contradictory explanations of critical questions in world politics.
eBook - PDFTheory and Metatheory in International Relations
Concepts and Contending Accounts
- F. Chernoff(Author)
- 2007(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
The systems all have the same ordering principle—anarchy. The difference between one international system and another then resides entirely in the third feature, distribution of capabilities. Some systems have one great power, some have two, and some have three or Policy Decisions and Theories of International Relations • 51 more. A system with two great powers (for example, Greece in 430 BCE) will be more like another system with two great powers (such as the global system of 1975) than like a system with three or more great powers (such as the European system in 1914) or a system with one great power (such as the global system of 2007). The theory explains the behavior of systems rather than states and does so with great simplicity, because it avoids the complications of numerous variables. Some of the recent work on this theory has pointed out that (C1) Realism, with its emphasis on state’s pursuing self-interest, is sometimes criticized for being unable to be “falsified”—whatever a state does may be argued after the fact to have been believed by the leaders to be in the state’s interests (see Chapter 3). Because of Waltz’s focus on the three chief principles, neorealism is widely seen as having the virtue of great simplicity. The theory has been questioned on the grounds of its lack of specificity of both its key principles and its predictions. We next turn to the way in which someone who endorses realism would be likely to make policy decisions. But we must bear in mind that the decision to adopt one of the available policies will depend on the acceptance of a set of goals along with both theoretical/casual propositions and a set of factual beliefs. A particular theoretical orientation such as realism might advocate mil- itary action in one case and no action at all in another case, depending on the facts of the matter. Democratic Realism The Doctrine Democratic realism, more commonly referred do as “neoconservatism,” is another approach that draws on realism.
eBook - PDFRealism and Fear in International Relations
Morgenthau, Waltz and Mearsheimer Reconsidered
- Arash Heydarian Pashakhanlou(Author)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
43 Realists are also pessimistic regarding the possibilities of a universal escape from power politics manifested in the form of competition, conflict and war. 44 These are the shared worldviews that makes realism a distinct approach in the study of international politics. These commonalities should however not distract us from the signifi- cant differences that also exist within the realist school of thought. Indeed, disagreements among realists are the reason why this intellectual tradition is frequently divided into different brands, branches or subschools. In fact, the subschools themselves are not exempt from internal divisions either. Hitherto, claims have been made for all sorts of different types of realisms, including “subaltern realism,” 45 “contingent realism,” 46 “generalist rea- lism,” 47 “specific realism” 48 and “willful realism,” 49 to mention a few. None of these types of realisms have however had a strong following or become deeply engrained in the literature. The only well-established forms of realism frequently referred to in the literature are classical realism (also known as human nature realism) and structural realism (also known as neorealism), which is further divided into defensive and offensive realism. Finally, there is also neoclassical realism. 50 Nowadays, the first generation of realist scholars are collectively known as classical realists. The principal realist scholars within this brand are E. H. Carr, 51 Reinhold Niebuhr, 52 Arnold Wolfers, 53 Raymond Aron 54 and, most 1 REALISM AND FEAR IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 5 prominently, Morgenthau. According to the classical realism or human nature realism of Morgenthau, power politics is the result of imperfections within human beings and he thus offers a bottom-up understanding of world politics. 55 This view was challenged by Waltz, who explained these outcomes in terms of structural pressures induced by the anarchic international system.
eBook - PDFInternational Studies
Interdisciplinary Approaches
- P. Aalto, V. Harle, S. Moisio, P. Aalto, V. Harle, S. Moisio(Authors)
- 2011(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
Morgenthau, H.J. (1970) Truth and Power (London: Pall Mall Press). Mousseau, Michael (2003) ‘The Nexus of Market Society, Liberal Preferences, and Democratic Peace: Interdisciplinary Theory and Evidence’, International Studies Quarterly , 47: 483–510. 30 Pami Aalto, Vilho Harle, David Long and Sami Moisio Neumann, I.B. and O.J. Sending (2007) ‘ “The International” as Governmentality’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 35(3): 677–701. Patomäki, H. (2002) After International Relations: Critical Realism and the (Re) Construction of World Politics (London: Routledge). Patomäki, H. and C. Wight (2000) ‘The Promises of Critical Realism’, International Studies Quarterly , 44(2): 213–37. Rengger, N. (2003) ‘Eternal Return? Modes of Encountering Religion in International Relations’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 32(2): 327–36. Schmidt, B.C. (2002) ‘On the History and Historiography of International Relations’ in W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse and B.A. Simmons (eds) Handbook of International Relations (London: SAGE). Smith, C.B. (2003) ‘How Do Textbooks Represent the Field of International Studies?’, International Studies Review, 5: 421–41. Strange, S. (1994) States and Markets (London: Pinter). Suganami, H. (1978) ‘A Note on the Origin of the Word “International” ’, British Journal of International Studies, 4(3): 226–32. Sylvester, C. (2007) ‘Whither the International at the End of IR’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 35(3): 551–73. Tickner, A. and O. Wæver (2009) ‘Conclusion: Worlding Where the West Once Was’, in A. Tickner and O. Wæver (eds) International Relations Scholarship around the World: Worlding beyond the West (London: Routledge). Vasquez, J.A. (1983) The Power of Power Politics (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press). Vattel, E. de (2005 [1758]) The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law, , date accessed 25 November 2010.
eBook - PDFWhy Politics Matters
An Introduction to Political Science
- Kevin Dooley, Joseph Patten, Kevin Dooley(Authors)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 272 although power politics helps to determine state behavior, it is the structure of the international system that best determines it. Agreeing with the primary assump- tions of classic realism in that the international system is anarchic and unstable because it lacks a global sovereign, Waltz added that it is the system itself that needs to be understood when explaining or predicting state behavior. For Waltz and other structural realists (or neorealists), it is the international system that determines the level of power within each state, not the states themselves. In short, Waltz con- cluded that although states matter, it is the system that matters more. For neorealists, state power is determined by the prospect of the balance of power within the international system. Sometimes the balance of power within the international system motivates states to pursue aggressive policies; sometimes it stifles them. Because all realists assert that states will pursue what is in their own national interests, structural realists argue that it is only plausible to assume that cer- tain states have limited potential within the existing international system. We must remember that structural realism is not an attack on classic realism; it is just an addi- tion or specification of it. The following section will highlight Kenneth Waltz’s three levels of analysis and the role of this framework in explaining international relations. Three Levels of Analysis According to Kenneth Waltz in his book Man, the State, and War, there are three ways of investigating the causes of war.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
