Open AccessA Constant State of War Or A Dog Eat Dog System?
Author(s) -
Nathan Andrews
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
politikon
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1583-3984
pISSN - 2414-6633
DOI - 10.22151/politikon.18.6
Subject(s) - realism , international relations , waltz , politics , perspective (graphical) , transformative learning , state (computer science) , scope (computer science) , power (physics) , power politics , political science , constant (computer programming) , epistemology , sociology , law and economics , law , philosophy , history , computer science , physics , quantum mechanics , artificial intelligence , art history , programming language , algorithm , pedagogy
It has become far too fashionable to adopt a (neo)realist approach to world affairs, especially since this approach purports to deal with the ‘here and now’ of international politics. While this perspective can be seductive and even dominating, it is imbued with certain shortfalls that cannot be left unchallenged. (Neo)realism often presents a world that is anarchic, bound by state power and self-interest. Although these are “real” features of world politics, an exclusive concentration on these aspects alone does not present a comprehensive understanding of what states do and why they do what they do. This paper investigates realism, particularly the realism of Hans Morgenthau and Kenneth Waltz, to ascertain the extent to which the assumptions these authors present explain the nature and scope of international relations. The contention is that (neo)realism’s perspective on world affairs is unprogressive, non-transformative, and deterministic of state behaviour, a feature that makes its analysis limited even in capturing the ‘here and now’.