Ir Midterm 2

Front 1

5 fundamental flaws

Back 1

1. Presentism: assuming what prevails today also prevailed every other time and place; using the present to understand the past.
2.Ahistoricism: studying the past to discover general laws that apply to all times and places, especially now.
3. Eurocentrism- assuming what happened in Europe and broader west is microcosm of what happened everywhere
4. Anarchophilia: assuming that international anarchy is natural and at root eternal; an inescapable structure.
5. State centrism: assuming states are always and forever dominant actors in IR, and they've always been structured internally and act pretty much like states of 20th century.

Front 2

Identify the theoretical approach most vulnerable to charges of B&L.

Back 2

The theory that is most vulnerable to B&L is classical realism, which is backed my morganthal, meirshiemer, Hobbes, and machivalli, because it falls into 4 of the 5 flaws.
The first is Ahistoricism, because realist always use Balance of Power as a tranhistorical theory to explain all periods of time. Rosenberg, a non-classical realist, critiques that realist assume the conflict between Athens and Sparta can be compared to the conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States during the Cold War without considering the underlying sociopolitical structures.
The second is state centrism, because realist focus on the inherent feature of the anarchic international system. They also focus on the balance of power which focuses on the state.
The third is Eurocentrism, because realist saw that the 18/19 century statesman as introducers of statecraft, which stabaliszed the anarchic structure of the European international system. English schoolers point out that ideas such as balance of power, diplomacy, sovereignty, and international laws were ideas ONLY flourished in European state systems.
The last is Anarchophilia, because realist believe the preoccupation of power and conflict, focuses more on military- political dimension in attempts to concepturalize the never ending struggle between states and international systems.

Front 3

identify approach least vulnerable to B+L

Back 3

The approach that is least likely to be vulnerable to B&L is social constructivism because it does not have any of the 5 flaws.


It does not have presentism because construtivist believe that states, individuals, and societies are always changing and adapt throught structuration.
Ahistoricism is not applicable because constructivist use history to reveal how the past is very unlike the present. For example, they want to show how what worked in greek-city states and itialian city states are different from behavoior in the European states because they did not develop the idea of balance of power. They believe understanding the international system is best effective on the basis of historical and comparative method.
Not anarchophila because the anarchic structure only exists because people believe it exists. Anarachy is what the state makes of it and is not eternal.
It is not state-centricism because they believe the state is not the main actor, but individuals make society which in turn shapes the state.

Front 4

When and what is the realism-idealism debate?

Back 4

The debate began after world war 1 and before wwii, also the interwar period.
Realist saw the world as it is, and preferred a pratical worldview of international systems. The Idealist on the other hand preferred the world to be a certain way, where it prevent war and violence.
Idealist theory included perfecting human beings and world policies to be better, but the Realist saw these views as too far fetched. Yet, as more conflicts and violence happened, the Realist theory gained more credibility.

Front 5

When and why did neorealism evolve from realism?

Back 5

Neorealism came in the 1950s, as a reaction to the scienctific revolution and a desire to make IR more scientific instead of historical. Waltz contributed largely with his book Theory of International Theory in 1979 outlining the neorealist theory. The difference between them is classical realist assume that human nature determines the outcome of wars and conflicts, while neorealist believe that because of the pressures of anarchy shape outcomes, regardless of human nature.

Front 6

When and why did neoliberalism arise to challenge the neorealist debate.

Back 6

Neoliberalism roots from 1950-60s, but the first challenge came in 1970s-80s with Nye and Keohane’s Power and Interdependence.
The neoliberalist wanted to spread the idea of transnationalism and complex interdependence. They believed the neorealist views of state cooperation through anarachy and transitional relations were outdated. Neorealist also believe the world is increasing linkages between state and non state actors, and military force is declining as a result.

Front 7

When did the neorealism and neoliberalism debate flourish and on what major points did two sides disagree?

Back 7

The debate flourished in the 1970s-1980s. Neorealist are more pesstimistic than neoliberals and believe that power and military strength are more important than the political economy, regimes and institutions.
They both agree on the existence of the anarchic international system; realist see the constraints on foreign policy, and are worried about survival, while liberals see globalization, interdependence, and regimes can change.
They disagreed on international cooperation. The realist see it is hard to achieve cooperation, and depends on the state’s power.
The liberals see that it is easy for cooperation as long as there is mutual interest.
They also disagreed on Gains, where the realist believed in relative gains, while liberals believe in common interests, absolute gains and cooperation.
Capabilities vs intentions the realist see that power over intentions and interests, while liberals believe In intentions and preference over power.
They had different focuses realist believed in relative power, security, and survival, while liberals believed in common intesters , absolute gains, and cooperation.
They both viewed institutions differently, Realist saw anarchy, while liberals saw regimes and institutions more important than self interest.

Front 8

When did constructivism challenge the two neos?

Back 8

Arrived in the 1980s. The constructivist rejected the material notion of power and asserted that the sociopolitical world is made up of shared beliefs.
Constructivist first challenged the neorealist with the cold war. Neorealism didn’t explain why other states didn’t challenge the US after the cold war with balance of power. Constructivists claim neorealist uncertainty is related to the fact that realist theory is overly materialistic. Thoughts and ideas lead to a better theory about anarchy and BOP.
Then they challenged neoliberals saying it is the end of history, progress of liberal ideas in world advance liberal democratic gov’t, very microscopic view. Constructivists analyze role of thinking and iddeas in general.
Constructivists reject materialism, which liberalism and realism is made of. The social and political world is made up of ideas and beliefs not physical entities. It also says from WEDNT that anarchy is what states make of it.