Possible corruption of power, influence for others and self-interest resembles Mayer’s ideas of how power is used by using three different approaches normative, utilitarian, and coercive. Mayer uses three possible ideas of how power is used and describes using power in three different ways which are; “We can appeal to other people’s values, beliefs and best selves”, or “appealing to people’s self-interest or to indicate that they will obtain certain tangible benefits”, or “force people to agree to something by threatening significant sanctions or by manipulating” – (Mayer, 2012, Pg. 82) Approaches that can be used when one gains the power and how they chose to use their power. Mayer’s three approach of use of power resembles the idea of power and corruption. Within corruption there is power and vice versa, but one has the choice of how they will use their power it is within that moment of how power will be used will determine
The essay provided an outline on each theory before going on to explain the theory’s view on what causes wars. After I evaluated and juxtaposed, it led me to the conclusion that even though there are changing and opposite explanations to answer the question of what causes wars, realism provided the most relevant answer. It seems as if the balance of threat against a potential hegemony has been the most relevant answer as to what causes wars. I can also conclude from this that because states are the primary actors in international relations they will seek to expand their power because they believe it is an essential element in an anarchical
Yin (2003a) maintains that data analysis consists of "examining, categorizing, tabulating, testing, or otherwise recombining both quantitative and qualitative evidence to address the initial propositions of a study" According to Yin there are the following analytic strategies for case studies: 1. Relying on theoretical
Realist main focus is History. And for survival the competition is important. There are three types of Realism: 1) Classical Realism: Any action from the state in the International politics is due to the human nature. 2) Structural Realism: The International politics depends on International system i.e. states are in Anarchy.
For Smith, the problem is that Cultural Studies on the one hand has always had "this kind of residual desire for some form of political efficacy"(The Renewal of Cultural Studies. P. 245), but on the other hand by its institutionalisation this desire would have "turned into something like a phantom limb." (Ibid. P. 246). So all three books have in common that they perceive a crisis of Cultural Studies and the need to change something in this field of studies.
Hegemony has been a subject of much scrutiny and research in the scholarly field around the world, given its central role and implications on the power relation networks in society; and this will be the focus of following paper. First, I will be dealing with Gramsci’s theory of hegemony. Then, I will demonstrate how ideology and discourse are central and powerful means through which a state imposes its hegemony; since ideology, hegemony and discourse are interwoven instruments that contribute to “the social production of knowledge” and “the perpetuation of power relations” (Stoddart). Finally, the last part of my paper will be devoted to counter hegemony as a potential means to resist domination. To begin with, the Italian philosopher and
Critical thinking poses questions such as how current situations come to exist or how power works to sustain particular contexts. Critical geopolitical writers, in contrast to realist observers, argue that the assumption of a detached and objective researcher recording the observable realities of international politics is fallacious. Far from being objective, the research perspective of realism often contributes to the presentation of a view, which appears to legitimate the power politics of states. In contrast, critical approaches to world politics would suggest that unless one challenges or question contemporary structures and power relations then academic approaches run the risk of merely condoning existing practices. Critical geopolitical scholars now acknowledge that their approaches to world politics are self-consciously situated within a body of conceptual and methodological assumptions about the world.
There are multiple reasons why a country offers development aid, but the most pervasive and realistic is to build up the relationship with another country, or more in tone with this research to increase its power over it. By offering financial, material or expertise aid, country A creates a new situation for country B in which it has to reach certain objectives agreed upon previously by the two actors. In this case we can say that this new situation is highly dependent on the actions of A. As A controls the possibility that B will receive the reward, B’s attainment of the objectives set is dependent on his subjective probability that A will present the reward in the case of conformity to the goals minus the probability that A will offer the reward even if the agreement is broken. This is one of the main issues of development aid today, as the main reasoning for its granting is stemming more from a humanitarian point of view rather than a clear realist and strictly contractual perspective, making its withdrawal or limitation a morally costly
Kenneth Waltz, who is considered to be the founder of neo- or structural realism, based his arguments on system theories. The international system, as he claimed, “is generated by the interactions of its principal parts” (i.e. dominant states) (Waltz 1979, 72), which in turn would shape the behavior of small states. Arnold Wolfers and James Rosenau had similar assumptions on small states’ foreign policy. Wolfers argues that the necessity to analyze the internal decision making and domestic politics is more crucial while studying the foreign policy of great powers, while Rosenau highlights the international environment as more of an important factor to consider in analyzing the foreign policy of small states due to the importance of systemic factors (Elman 1995,
F.S Northedge says that foreign policy implies “the use of political influence in order to induce other state to experience”. Prof. Joseph Frankel says that “foreign policy consists decisions and action which involve to some appreciable extents relation between one state and others”. According to Rode, Anderson and Cristal foreign policy involves the formulation and implementation of principles of groups which shapes to the behavior pattern of a state in its negotiation with the others state, to protect or promote its vital interest. 1) Determinants of Foreign Policy: The foreign policy of a country is compounded of many factors and forces. Some of them are permanent, others temporary.