Constructivism in International Relations: from a theory between positivism and postpositivism to the theory of the world state

Constructivism emerged at the end of the Cold War and entered into IR theories debate by criticizing the rationalists (neo-liberal and neo-realist) on the one hand and critics on the other, accusing them of failing to predict and explain the end of the Cold War. While rationalists focus on material and economic factors, constructivists focus on cultural factors, the influence of ideas, norms and identities on the explanation of processes of interest formation, how to define survival and defining mechanisms of international politics, and emphasize that interest and identity interact through socio-historical processes and constitute each other. Thus, constructivism belongs to the fourth debate in the theoretical study of International Relations and it is one of the post-positivist theories, but it attempts to serve as a bridge between the positivist and post-positivist approaches. For example, if post-positivist theories are criticized, because of suffering from providing a realistic alternative versus of the description and explanation offered by rational theories, constructivism tries to overcome this criticism and it is able to provide the research program required to remove the post-positivist dilemma, by providing the practical hypotheses required by the establishment of a theory to describe and explain the reality of international relations. However, constructivism is not immune from criticism, it is accused that it does not offer anything new and exaggerates the understanding of cultural factors such as norms and identities and their impact on the reality of international relations, as well as its epistemological and methodological problems and its internal divisions between modern constructivists and postmodern constructivists.