Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

12 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Contrast realist, liberal, and constructivist understandings of the consequences of the rise of China.
R:See's China as an adversary, but they cant cut off relations because of money loss.However they believe that china could fight for the top position
L:Its good for everyone in economics, however china could become to powerful
C: Afraid China will make new norms, or non-interference
What would be the major predictions about the next two decades of balance of power theory [or complex interdependence theory, or economic structuralism]?
BOP:Would predict that China will keep the US in check.
CIT:There will be more actors striving for less war, because it is not in the best interest of their issues.Optimistic about the chance of peace.
ES: Believe world trade will lead to war.Because of cheap labor and raw materials. OR they will continue to exploit the weak.
Discuss the role of international institutions (such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, or the European Union) from the view of the five approaches we’ve studied [or some subset]. Why do their views on this question vary?
R: Sees these differenct organizations as a form of power and a way of manipulation.
L:Loves the idea, shows how cooperation is possible, and how everyone gains from it.
ES:Is only interested in the relations between different classes, and the equalizaton of them.
Contrast the normative positions of [any two of the five paradigms we’ve studied].
R:State interest should be priority, protect the state rather than improve the world
L:Promote collaborations to bring peace and properity
ES:Reduce economic and political inequality
C:varies, compatible with others;ideas
F:emancipation of women, less masculinized view of world politics
How do balance of power theory, liberal institutionalism, and economic structuralist theories differ in their explanation of wars in the international system? Which is the superior explanation?
BOP:Believe wars begin when the balance is thrown off, either by one nations trying to pull ahead, and the others fight that.
LI:Believe that Cooperation should be strived for in order for everyone to be better off.It is only when collaboration breaks down that war begins.
ES:No agreeing viewpoint.Vladimir lenin:capitalism leads to war
another view is that wealthy nations will avoid war, and just continue to exploit the weak.
Which broad theoretical approach offers the most insight into the US-Iraq war of 2003?
Constructivism,Because it would not rely on material things to explain how this started, It could instead ask the question of where the interest came from
How does the constructivist approach to interests differ from those of realism and economic structuralism?
Constructivism does not have a materialistic interest, as realism does with military power, and how ES does with economic power and its distribution between worker and capital. Constructivism believes that a populations ideas is the driving force.
How does a feminist conception of power relate to those of realism, liberalism, and economic structuralism?
F: Believes that power, in realism,was assigned a male gender, in being that power is defined as ruthless, coercion,and fighting. Where feminists believe that cooperation is a more effective method, wich is similar to belief in cooperation. F is also compatible with Structuralsim, in the fact that both believe they are being opressed, and that power is better is it were more leveled.
How might a feminist alter conventional development strategies?
They would 1)consider the effects of women and children before entering war. 2)would want to ave cooperation and strive for that as an alternative to war.
Which aspects of the feminist critique of conventional international relations theory are most compelling?
The argument that a "femenistic" approach to international politics would be more beneficial for all countries. That a masculine viewpoint for war is unnecesary.
How do constructivists differ from realists on the significance of the Westphalian state system?
R: Believes IP is anarchic, wich is what the westphalian system is in response to.But because the world is unchangeable, the westphalian system is irrelevent.
C: Believes that the westphalian system slowly integrated the idea of sovereignty to the population.nations began to see eachother in a new light. WS was integrates sometimes unwillingly fro tribes, colonies, ect, into them being a soverign nation.
Looking at [any one of the five major approaches], identify [and discuss] the approach’s greatest strengths and weaknesses.
Good:1)One of the greatest strength of constructivism is its ability to be used with L,S,R in order to make more sence of different situations.
-R:It helps explain state goals, wether it is "revolutionary" or "status quo" power.
ES: explains why capitalism is so difficult to overthrow, because of the widespread belief that globalization makes all nations more prosperous
L: believe that constructivism supports the idea of cooperation in an anrchic world, and how changing norms and ideals help collaborations between states, that realism believes possible.
2) To promote different norms, in wich cooperation will become more accepted
Bad:It cannot explain how which, and when specific ideas cause certain cituations, because there is an infinite amount of identity to cycle through.