Tenets of Realism

Getting Started

There are countless subtleties to the interpretation of one’s position on IR theories. The major schools of thought are, accordingly, broken into different strains or sub theories. A fundamental divide in realism is between the older, so called classical realists, like Thucydides, and the newer approaches to understanding the modern world through realism devised by so called neorealists, like Kenneth Waltz. The main split involves the sources of motivating behavior in devising policies that are either fundamentally self-interested or focused on the maximization of one’s own national power. The ancient realist thinkers, and many well into the twentieth century, subscribed to the notion that realist approaches came naturally to most leaders because they are rooted deeply in human nature. They believe in the idea that people will always work to secure themselves first and foremost. Self-preservation is said to be the first rule of existence in the natural world, to which humankind is always beholden.

Thinkers like Thucydides felt that all leaders were subject to these tendencies in viewing the rest of the world and that, ultimately, they would likely be forced to pursue these tendencies. A leader must deal with the world the way it exists, not as one might wish it to exist. Newer realists, or neorealists, have grown away from the central tenets of realism to adopt a more utilitarian or practical approach. They largely reject the idea that humans are somehow hard wired to behave in a realist way. Instead of using human nature as an explanation, neorealists believe that political leaders are (and should be) realists in their policies because the international arena is simply far too turbulent or anarchical to guarantee the country’s wellbeing by any other approach to statecraft. Otherwise, the realist and neorealist traditions overlap to a substantial degree. They agree somewhat about how to act as a country, but perhaps less about the motivating factors behind why a country does so in the first place.

Upon successful completion of this discussion, you will be able to:

• Articulate the central arguments and values of realism as a school of international relations.

 

Resources

• Textbook: International Relations Theory: A Primer
• Video: Understanding the Global Community – Realism/Neorealism

 

 

Background Information

Now that you have a handle on some of the ins and outs of realism and neorealism, it is time to put some of this in your own words and perform some analysis. Open discussion is a great way to sort through these concepts, evaluate your own ideas against the thoughts of others, and arrive at a more precise determination about your own opinions. In this exercise, you should have a solid understanding of what you have read and have an open mind about what you will encounter from others.

The task in this discussion is to compare and contrast the different types of realism with your fellow students. You are not expected to articulate every nuance of these advanced intellectual ideas. Rather, focus on providing a general evaluation of what the strains of realist thought mean to you and whether you think they even make sense as vehicles for explaining the political world. The specific questions in the following discussion exercise should serve as a useful guide in formulating your answer. The second chapter in the course textbook does a good job of explaining the main points of each approach.

 

 

Instructions

1. Read Chapter 2, “Realism,” in your textbook, International Relations Theory: A Primer.
2. Watch the video Understanding the Global Community – Realism/Neorealism, and/or read the Understanding the Global Community – Realism/Neorealism Transcript.(found online)
3. After completing the reading and reviewing the resources supporting this activity, navigate to the threaded discussion and respond to these questions:
   1. What would you say is the single most important element of classical realism?
   2. What is one thing that makes neorealism different from the classical realist tradition?
   3. What do you think is the role of human nature in the distinction between the two approaches?
   4. Do either classical realism or neorealism happen to appeal to you in terms of accurately explaining the way international politics should be conducted?
   5. Your post should be between 200 and 300 words long.
   6. Use at least two scholarly resources. Add references in APA format at the end of your post.
   7. Be well developed by providing clear answers with evidence of critical thinking supported by at least two academic sources.

 

What Students Are Saying About Us

.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but you proved you are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"

.......... Customer ID: 11***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"This company is the best there is. They saved me so many times, I cannot even keep count. Now I recommend it to all my friends, and none of them have complained about it. The writers here are excellent."

“Order a custom Paper on Similar Assignment at essayfount.com! No Plagiarism! Enjoy 20% Discount!”