Lecture 2 - Jan. 9th, 2019
Idealism vs Realism
Hans J. Morgenthau, Six Principles of Political Realism
Reading Notes: Kenneth N. Waltz, Structural Realism after the Cold War
1. Political realism believes that politics, like society in general, is governed by objective
laws that have their roots in human nature.
2. The main signpost that helps political realism to find its way through the landscape of
international politics is the concept of interest defined in terms of power.
3. Realism assumes that its key concept of interest defined as power is an objective category
which is universally valid, but it does not endow that concept with a meaning that is fixed
once and for all.
4. Political realism is aware of the moral significance of political action.
5. Political realism refuses to identify the moral aspirations of a particular nation with the
moral laws that govern the universe.
6. The difference, then, between political realism and other schools of thought is real, and it
is profound.
Anarchy, self-help, and power balancing have been replaced by new conditions which call for
new ideas. ← The author agrees that, should the conditions a theory contemplates change, the
theory no longer applies.
The question, however, is what sort of changes would be able to alter the international political
system so profoundly that old ways of thinking would no longer be relevant? How can realism
be completely obsolete?
Waltz’s answer:
- Changes in the structure of the international political system are distinct from changes at
the unit level. Thus, changes in polarity affect how states provide for their security.
- Polarity: any of the ways in which power is distributed within the international
system.
- The end of the cold war coincided with a “democratic wave”.
- Democratic peace thesis: democracies don’t fight democracies.
What causes war? Kant’s answer: anything; the natural state is the state of war. Under the
conditions of international politics, war recurs; the sure way to abolish war, then, is to abolish
international politics.
, Early Theorizing in International Relations
- The distinction between economics and political science as two separate disciplines
occured around WWI.
- After WWI, it was agreed by many scholars of international law that a system, or laws,
were needed in order to prevent war between the states. The people that thought this
were called idealists. (also called Utopians)
Classical Idealism - To be an idealist meant to strive for a system free of war.
Core Assumptions:
1. Human behaviour can be perfect.
- An assumption that humans can be very, very good.
2. A “harmony of interests” exists between people and between states.
- An assumption that everyone has an interest in “getting along” with one another.
3. Therefore war is never an appropriate way to resolve disputes. Instead, the harmony
needs to be uncovered.
- Again, this comes from the attitude after WWI. Even for the winners, the war
was incredibly costly and in a way “not worth it”.
4. With the correct laws and institutions guiding behaviour, the harmony of interests will be
revealed.
Historians looked at WWI and concluded that it was not unique; there have been wars of such
magnitude many times throughout history. Argued with idealists.
Classical Realism
● Prominent authors: Hans J. Morgenthau, Edward Hallett Carr, and Reinhold Niebuhr
● Emphasizes human nature
○ Morgenthau starts with the premise that a theoretical approach towards politics
should be considered as an approach towards human beings, who he
conceptualizes as rational, egoistic, and power-driven.
○ States must struggle for survival in the same way that men do in Hobbes' state of
nature.
● States try to pursue their interests, defined in terms of power, against the interests of other
states.
Core Assumptions:
1. Humans have a will to survive, which makes them selfish.
- This is the key starting point that is different between realists and idealists.
2. The will to survive equals a will to dominate.
Idealism vs Realism
Hans J. Morgenthau, Six Principles of Political Realism
Reading Notes: Kenneth N. Waltz, Structural Realism after the Cold War
1. Political realism believes that politics, like society in general, is governed by objective
laws that have their roots in human nature.
2. The main signpost that helps political realism to find its way through the landscape of
international politics is the concept of interest defined in terms of power.
3. Realism assumes that its key concept of interest defined as power is an objective category
which is universally valid, but it does not endow that concept with a meaning that is fixed
once and for all.
4. Political realism is aware of the moral significance of political action.
5. Political realism refuses to identify the moral aspirations of a particular nation with the
moral laws that govern the universe.
6. The difference, then, between political realism and other schools of thought is real, and it
is profound.
Anarchy, self-help, and power balancing have been replaced by new conditions which call for
new ideas. ← The author agrees that, should the conditions a theory contemplates change, the
theory no longer applies.
The question, however, is what sort of changes would be able to alter the international political
system so profoundly that old ways of thinking would no longer be relevant? How can realism
be completely obsolete?
Waltz’s answer:
- Changes in the structure of the international political system are distinct from changes at
the unit level. Thus, changes in polarity affect how states provide for their security.
- Polarity: any of the ways in which power is distributed within the international
system.
- The end of the cold war coincided with a “democratic wave”.
- Democratic peace thesis: democracies don’t fight democracies.
What causes war? Kant’s answer: anything; the natural state is the state of war. Under the
conditions of international politics, war recurs; the sure way to abolish war, then, is to abolish
international politics.
, Early Theorizing in International Relations
- The distinction between economics and political science as two separate disciplines
occured around WWI.
- After WWI, it was agreed by many scholars of international law that a system, or laws,
were needed in order to prevent war between the states. The people that thought this
were called idealists. (also called Utopians)
Classical Idealism - To be an idealist meant to strive for a system free of war.
Core Assumptions:
1. Human behaviour can be perfect.
- An assumption that humans can be very, very good.
2. A “harmony of interests” exists between people and between states.
- An assumption that everyone has an interest in “getting along” with one another.
3. Therefore war is never an appropriate way to resolve disputes. Instead, the harmony
needs to be uncovered.
- Again, this comes from the attitude after WWI. Even for the winners, the war
was incredibly costly and in a way “not worth it”.
4. With the correct laws and institutions guiding behaviour, the harmony of interests will be
revealed.
Historians looked at WWI and concluded that it was not unique; there have been wars of such
magnitude many times throughout history. Argued with idealists.
Classical Realism
● Prominent authors: Hans J. Morgenthau, Edward Hallett Carr, and Reinhold Niebuhr
● Emphasizes human nature
○ Morgenthau starts with the premise that a theoretical approach towards politics
should be considered as an approach towards human beings, who he
conceptualizes as rational, egoistic, and power-driven.
○ States must struggle for survival in the same way that men do in Hobbes' state of
nature.
● States try to pursue their interests, defined in terms of power, against the interests of other
states.
Core Assumptions:
1. Humans have a will to survive, which makes them selfish.
- This is the key starting point that is different between realists and idealists.
2. The will to survive equals a will to dominate.
