Transcript Understanding IR Theories I: Liberalism and Realism

Understanding IR
Theories I: Liberalism
and Realism
I. Introduction
A. Let’s start with some question relating
to what we discussed on W of last week:
1) Which worldview--Fukayama’s,
Huntington’s, Kaplan’s, Friedman’s, or
Barber’s--do you think best explains the way
the world works NOW and
2) Which worldview(s) do you think
does NOT do a very good job of explaining
how the world works NOW?
I. Introduction
B. For the next few days, we discuss IR theory:
1) Today we examine the two dominant
theories of world politics this century
a. Liberalism/Idealism
b. Realism
2) Wednesday, we examine radical
theories of IR (Marxism, World Systems,
Dependencia, Feminist, etc)
3) Question: what is theory?
II. The Liberal Worldview
A. According to K&W (p. 28), liberalism is "a
paradigm predicated on the hope that the
application of reason and universal ethics
to international relations can lead to a
more orderly, just, and cooperative world,
and that international anarchy [lack of a
hierarchy/world government] and war can
be policed by institutional reforms that
empower international organizations and
laws"
II. The Liberal Worldview
B. Modern Liberalism based on the following
set of assumptions:
1) Human nature is essentially "good”
2) The fundamental human concern for
others' welfare makes progress possible
3) Sinful or wicked human behavior such as
violence is not the product of flawed
people but of evil institutions
II. The Liberal Worldview
B. Modern Liberalism based on the
following set of assumptions:
4) War and international anarchy are NOT
inevitable
5) War is a global problem requiring
collective rather than national efforts to
control it
6) Reforms must be inspired by a
compassionate ethical concern for the
welfare and security of all people
7) International society must reorganize
itself in order to eliminate the institutions
that make war likely
III. The Liberal Reform
Agenda
1st group advocated creating intl.
institutions which would replace the
anarchic, war-prone balance-of-power
system
2nd group emphasized the use of legal
processes such as mediation and
arbitration to settle disputes and avoid
interstate wars
3rd group followed the biblical injunction
that states should beat their swords into
plowshares and disarm
IV. The Realist Worldview
A. Definition. (Kegley & Wittkopf, p31):
Realism is “a paradigm based on the
premise that world politics is
essentially and unchangeably a
struggle among self-interested states
for power and position under
anarchy, with each competing state
pursuing its own national interests”
IV. The Realist Worldview
B. The core of classical realist theory is best
summarized in the form of 10
assumptions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
People are by nature narrowly selfish and ethically
flawed
Of all people's evil ways, none are more prevalent or
dangerous than their instinctive lust for power and
their desire to dominate others
The possibility of eradicating these instincts is a
utopian "pipedream"
International politics is a struggle for power, "a war
of all against all”
The primary objective of every state--the goal to
which all other objectives should be subordinated
to--is to promote its NATIONAL INTERESTS
IV. The Realist Worldview
B. The core of classical realist theory is best
summarized in the form of 10
assumptions:
6) The anarchical nature of the intl system dictates that
states acquire sufficient military capabilities to deter
attack by potential enemies and to exercise influence
over others
7) Economics is less relevant to ntl security than is
military might
8) Allies might increase a state's ability to defend itself,
but their loyalty and reliability should never be
assumed
9) States should NEVER entrust the task of self-protection
to intl security organizations or intl law
10) If all states seek to maximize power, stability will result
by maintaining a balance of power
V. Strengths/Weaknesses of
Both Theories
A. Liberalism
1.
2.
3.
B. Realism
1.
2.
3.