Realism remains the dominant paradigm in International Relations theory. Discuss

Authors Avatar

Realism remains the dominant paradigm in International Relations theory.                                                       Discuss

In this essay, I will be answering the question as to why realism remains the dominant paradigm in International Relations theory. I believe it is still the dominant paradigm in International Relations. This essay will consist of not only my thoughts as to why it is the dominant paradigm but certain facts and thoughts of other people. I will be attempting to provide you with an insight on the several different theories in international relations. The main topic of discussion will be realism as it is part of the question, in addition there will be explanations on the several different types of realism; human nature, classical and neo-realism. The history of realism in accordance with actual events will be provided and several other reasons will be explained to help me provide an adequate answer as to why realism remains the dominant paradigm in International Relations theory. It is perhaps necessary to begin this essay with an explanation of what realism actual is and an insight to the different types of realism.

Realism is just one of the several different types of theories in International Relations. Realism is not just a theory; it branches out into major schools of thought. There are several ‘branches’ of realism; human nature realism, classical realism and neo-realism. All the different types of realism have some similar characteristics in that they are all say that states are the primary actors. They all agree on the concept of ‘balance’ of power’ and have little focus on cooperation.

 

Classical and Human nature realism are very similar to each other but they are very different to neo-realism. The characteristics behind Classical Realism are that we live in an anarchical society where moralities are not considered. Machiavelli contributed to this paradigm by writing the book ‘The Prince’ in which he provides his ideal way ‘ to govern’ power and maintain it. In addition Machiavelli contributes to Classical Realism by adding that it is all about leadership, in that the way leaders lead their states determines the outcome of that state (Action determines events). Classical realists believe that each state is anarchic and will protect its self-interest over those around them, they believe that governments and big leaders are all power-seeking and that states primary concern is security and survival.

 

Human nature realism focuses on self-interests. They say that the problems in the Global World come from ‘man’s human nature’. Human nature realism dominated the study of international relations from the late 1940’s. It is based on the simple assumption that states are led by human beings who have a ‘will to power’ hardwired to them at birth. States have an insatiable appetite for power, or what Morgenthau calls a ‘limitless lust for power’ which means that they constantly look for opportunity to take the offensive and dominate other states. To best reiterate this idea of realism, take Morgenthau’s six principles of political realism from his most famous book ‘Politics Among Nations’. The first being that realism believes that politics, like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their roots in human nature. Secondly, is the ‘concept of interest defined in terms of power’, meaning interest relies or depends on power, which then includes the third principle which is self-interest being objective and universally valid. Following this is the moral principles, which do not guide state behaviour according to realists. The fifth principle is that political realism refuses to identify the moral aspirations of a particular notion with the moral laws that govern the universe. The final principle is that realism in an independent sphere and the view on international politics is based on power and is anarchic.

Join now!

Neorealists (so called because they have adapted and refined realism) try to explain of international events in terms of the system structure – the international distribution of power – rather than the internal makeup of individual states, neo-realism is thus also called structural realism. Neo-realism is more scientific in the sense of proposing general laws to explain events. The neo-realist theory was advanced by Kenneth Waltz who ignored human nature and focused on the effects of the international system. For Waltz, the international system consisted of a number of great powers, each seeking to survive. Because the system is ...

This is a preview of the whole essay