Philosopher views
Download 5.81 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Realism in international relations
Realism ResponsesIntroduction Suppose I meet a student. She is bright, attractive, and talented. She has a good life ahead of her, and people like her. True, she has dealt with some hard things in her life: Her parents have divorced, she has faced poverty, perhaps childhood trauma of some sort or another. But all in all, as an independent observer, I see her as a good person with a bright future. But she doesn’t see herself that way. She thinks she is a bad person. Her low self-esteem prevents her from entering into relationships with other people that could be mutually beneficial: jobs, business arrangements, creative projects; all of these seem scary to her because she doesn’t think the world is the kind of place where such relationships will be in her interest. She doesn’t trust other people. Where I point out to her that many people care about her and they are good people, she responds that they only act friendly because they want something from her. Their friendliness will end when she no longer serves their interests. Most of us have been in this situation. We see someone who is depressed, who doesn’t trust other people. We point out to them that the people around them are good. They don’t believe us. Moreover (and this is where this story actually becomes relevant to the topic at hand), they interpret the actions of those around them in a primarily negative way. In the case of my friend, she sees other people doing good things and she says, “They are just doing those things to seem good. They’re trying to fool me.” Of course, any time those people slip up and do something bad, she can say, “See! I told you they were bad people.” In a nutshell, this frustrating situation describes the philosophy of “Realism,” a school of thought among elites in International Relations which holds that nation-states are basically warlike, self-serving, and Machiavellian. Realism has been the ruling paradigm in American International Relations for several generations. Armies and navies are built up and maintained around the world because Realism tells us that the military, and war, are necessary conditions of humanity. Nuclear weapons are built and put on alert, pointed at various nations, because Realism says that we must prepare for the worst, and that only by scaring our potential adversaries can they be made to cooperate. Domestic problems are ignored in favor of spending money on the power to threaten other nations. And like the case of the depressed student, Realism’s grim view of humanity rests, essentially, on a self-fulfilling prophecy. In this essay I will lay out the conceptual foundations of Realism, describing its major points. I will then list the numerous problems with the philosophy. My major objection to Realism is that it is based on a selective and self-serving interpretation of empirical data, leading to conclusions that are palatable to elites, but quite undesirable for the majority of humanity. Realism in international relationsThe ghost of Nietzsche: Realism begins with the premise that elites seek to gain and maintain power. I say “begins” with this premise, because it is not justified except by turning to various historical examples, and as I shall argue below, those examples are selectively employed. Setting that objection aside, recall that Nietzsche saw the Will to Power as a pervasive, unavoidable life-force which was more honestly manifest in elites than in underlings. If Nietzsche is correct, then those who lead nation states are driven primarily by the Will to Power: the drive to make their nations, their legacies, and themselves more powerful. Moreover, power in international relations is a zero-sum game. Because we live in a kind of global anarchy, and because resources are scarce, then anything my leader gains is something somebody else’s leader loses. If this second premise is combined with the first, we have a picture of the world of international politics that resembles the one described in the main points laid out by University of Hawaii political scientist Richard W. Chadwick: 1. Conflict is an effort to attain one's goals in a manner that interferes with other's attaining their goals. 2. Latent vs. Manifest conflict: sometimes conflict is not apparent to people; they are in fact interfering with each other's goal attainment, but one or the other does not know it. We call this "latent" or "hidden" conflict. When it's one sided, it's sabotage or espionage. When it's overt, it's "manifest" or "open" conflict. 3. Conflict exists at many levels. Examples: from within a person to interpersonal relations, to relations between persons and organizations, between organizations, states, and alliances. 4. Conflict becomes increasingly important as the stress leaders experience from not attaining their goals becomes increasingly unbearable, threatening to those values they hold most dear. 5. As conflict becomes more unbearable, more costly means are used to attain goals. 6. Estimating costs relative to the progress made by alternative strategies is one of key abilities of leadership. 7. What are leaders' goals? Succinctly: to survive, as leaders (that is, in position, with power). 8. Conflict will be with us as long as people have values and goals that can be achieved only at each other's expense. Since people have values and goals that are incompatible, conflict is inevitable. (source: http://www.hawaii.edu/intlrel/pols320/Text/Theory/realism-lecture.htm) The reader first notices the Realists’ obsession with conflict. Conflict is inevitable, because leaders want to gain and keep power, and because International Relations is a zero-sum game. Each of the eight points above has particular historical antecedents: “As conflict becomes more unbearable, more costly means are used to obtain goals,” as in the case of the United States’ escalation in the Vietnam War. Likewise, the “stress leaders experience from not attaining their goals…threatening to those values they hold most dear,” could be the United States shifting from isolationism to aggression in the Second World War. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 5.81 Mb. Share with your friends:
|