Strategic information security field has increased in the last from century from World War I, World War II and the current and post the Cold War. Obviously, the status quo changed with the end of the Cold War and the onset of the September 11th?s attacks on America, the strategic security field is now abuzz with what will come next. Among the strategic security analysts, we have seen that Huntington believes in future conflict, which is based on ?civilization? lines drawn on a variety of geographic, religious beliefs and ethnicities among others. Each of these modern social scientists has created concepts from the past and present, as well as future paradigm shifts of how international security will evolve. The prior cited examples separate
…show more content…
These authors have carefully tried to create a theoretical picture of what the international landscape will appear to be based on an array of discoveries in personal, their perceptions of possible future conflicts and international factors. Creating theories that explain, past, present, and future phenomena is not a new approach in academics. Most notably, many in the field of physics have tried to explain how matter acts while in motion through space time; not just today, and yesterday, but tomorrow, as well. When trying to explaining how electromagnetism and gravity were interrelated, Einstein coined the term ?unified field theory? (UFT) by combining two distinct concepts in one fundamental field. Similarly, many academics in the field of classical and modern sociology have tried to create theories that combine many concepts to create a UFT theory with respect to the study of security and international relations within that field. This sociological UFT attempts to answer three specific issues about the true nature of man and how conflict is created, how can future conflict be avoided, what the current state of international relations with regards to the actors are and the rules of international relations, and what will the future of international …show more content…
For example, Martin van Creveld?s text The Transformation of War takes on the once untouchable theories of Clausewitz and attempts to create a modernized version of Vom Kriege. Waltz credits many classical authors, including Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, Spinoza, Mill and others, for creating and defending the foundation for his arguments in Man, the State, and War. Additionally, much like their predecessors, contemporary authors cite trends within the international landscape. Those from the Italian Renaissance noted the religious influences, corrupt government, and monarchies that led their times and promoted strong, sometimes ruthless leadership to promote order and peace. Those within the Enlightenment saw the hereditary monarchies last gasps and saw how ?civilized? man granted leadership the authority to govern, but only to the extent that was allowable by the hoi polloi. So to does the contemporary author notice the current state of the individual, the nation-state, and the interaction of these entities upon the world stage. The contemporary academic sees the evolution of a bi-polar era, to a unipolar landscape now dotted with subnational actors vying for influence through violent conflict that some denote as civilizational in nature (Huntington). Additionally, many relevant authors within the last few years view the future of international security through a post-9/11 lens.
These authors have carefully tried to create a theoretical picture of what the international landscape will appear to be based on an array of discoveries in personal, their perceptions of possible future conflicts and international factors. Creating theories that explain, past, present, and future phenomena is not a new approach in academics. Most notably, many in the field of physics have tried to explain how matter acts while in motion through space time; not just today, and yesterday, but tomorrow, as well. When trying to explaining how electromagnetism and gravity were interrelated, Einstein coined the term ?unified field theory? (UFT) by combining two distinct concepts in one fundamental field. Similarly, many academics in the field of classical and modern sociology have tried to create theories that combine many concepts to create a UFT theory with respect to the study of security and international relations within that field. This sociological UFT attempts to answer three specific issues about the true nature of man and how conflict is created, how can future conflict be avoided, what the current state of international relations with regards to the actors are and the rules of international relations, and what will the future of international …show more content…
For example, Martin van Creveld?s text The Transformation of War takes on the once untouchable theories of Clausewitz and attempts to create a modernized version of Vom Kriege. Waltz credits many classical authors, including Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, Spinoza, Mill and others, for creating and defending the foundation for his arguments in Man, the State, and War. Additionally, much like their predecessors, contemporary authors cite trends within the international landscape. Those from the Italian Renaissance noted the religious influences, corrupt government, and monarchies that led their times and promoted strong, sometimes ruthless leadership to promote order and peace. Those within the Enlightenment saw the hereditary monarchies last gasps and saw how ?civilized? man granted leadership the authority to govern, but only to the extent that was allowable by the hoi polloi. So to does the contemporary author notice the current state of the individual, the nation-state, and the interaction of these entities upon the world stage. The contemporary academic sees the evolution of a bi-polar era, to a unipolar landscape now dotted with subnational actors vying for influence through violent conflict that some denote as civilizational in nature (Huntington). Additionally, many relevant authors within the last few years view the future of international security through a post-9/11 lens.