Theory of International Politics Essays

In Theories of International Politics and Zombies, Dan Drezner applies fundamental international relations theories in the case of a hypothetical event of a zombie uprising. Drezner focuses on the how the different theories of international relations would approach the issue of zombies. Drezner tackles the case of the walking dead mainly using international relation theories: realism, liberalism, and social constructivism. Drezner starts with the realism, or realpolitik, theory, and describes how

Throughout the rather unusual book, “Theories of International Politics and Zombies”, written by prominent Tufts University Professor Dr. Daniel W. Drezner, the readers of this publication are given insight to the various possibilities of governmental responses (referring to the theories of international relations) to a zombie plague. According to Professor Drezner today, in age, the world faces several “natural sources of fear” (pg. 1) and these issues may range from acts of terrorism, deadly contagions

they play in International Politics. Eurocentrism is a concept that places Europe at the centre of the world. Assuming that it is self containing and self representing, the entire world is looked at with Europe at the centre. Eurocentrism bias leads to an illogical understanding of International Relations and makes politics and judgement to incline in the favour of the powerful. In this essay, I will critique the Eurocentric nature of International Relations theory and world politics. The one-sided

Alexander Wendt's Social Theory of International Politics proposes a theory that places great importance on the role of identity, shared ideas and norms in defining state behaviour. He theorises a structural and idealist worldview which contrasts with the individualism and materialism that underpins much of the mainstream international relations theories. As I explore the gist of Wendt's book, I will attempt to summarise the key findings, contributions to International Relations and to a certain

effect on how each view the nature of international politics? Introduction This paper will focus on the main difference of certain points in two theories, idea of “capabilities” by neorealist Kenneth Waltz and idea of “power” by Hans Morgenthau. Both theorists tried to explain how the international system works and how its structure has an influence on the international politics. In first two parts of this essay, there will be described individual theories, and in the third part there will be a

The international relations schools of thought known as Realism and Idealism identify specific and similar characteristics of actors in the conceptual development of their theories. While many of these characteristics can be generalized as being synonymous with the two theories, both theories make a separate distinction in what specifically constitutes an actor. In Realism, the term “actor” refers directly and solely to the state: a combination of government, leaders, decision-makers, etc, that act

the perspectives of Huntington, Mearsheimer and Zakaria. These three ideologists argued how fighting for, maintaining and continuing to have power shape the world and put states in their rightful place. With the application of mainstream theories of international relations, the current world order will be illustrated throughout this paper. Samuel Huntington made a hypothesis on what the new world order may be after the Cold War. Since after the said conflict, civilizations were separated not just

International relations is the study of the political and social interaction of state, non-state actors, and individuals. It is a universal descriptor used to emphasize a multifaceted and multidisciplinary subject area. There are contesting theories which seek to simplify and describe the contemporary world of international affairs. Realism is one of its theories, which characterizes the international political system as anarchic, comprised of states possessing military capabilities, and distinguished

Within the study of international relations, neoliberalism is a theory about achieving international cooperation between states in the international system. Neoliberalism can be seen as a response to structural realism. These two theories have in common that their main focus of analysis is the state and its interests. They also have the same interest in studying rationality and utility maximizing. Another assessment that these two theories share is that cooperation is very difficult to accomplish

2.2.1 Constructivism Social Constructivism is one of international relations approach. This approach challenged the rationalism and positivism of neorealism and neoliberalism. One of constructivism character is its emphasis on the importance of normative as well as material structures, the role of identity in shaping political action and on the mutually constitutive relationship between agents and structures (Burchill et al. 2005: 188). The term “constructivism” was first introduced by Nicholas

Classical realism and structural realism are both theories of International Relations, therefore huge differences are noticed in between those two. The main difference lies in the motivation to power, which is seen differently by both theories. Classical realism is concentrated in the desire of power- influence, control and dominance as basic to human nature. Whereas, structural realism is focused on the international system anarchic structure and how the great powers behave. Classical realists believe

evaluate Critical Theory and how it is applied in the sphere of International Relations (referred to from this point as IR). Critical Theory is one of many lenses through which one can view and interpret interaction between nations; others include Realism, Liberalism, Structuralism and Post-Modernism. Contained within this essay will be detailed analysis of the ideas and thinkers which have shaped Critical Theory, as well as criticisms of the theory and key differences between this theory and other prevalent

member states, respectively. With regards to this desired approach, this will be an interpretation of Immanuel Kant’s conception of cosmopolitanism. In an edited version of Kant’s seminal publication “Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History”, Allen W. Wood (2006;261) highlights that the central premise underpinning the term cosmopolitanism is that human

Interstate co-operation stands at the summit of accomplishment for Idealist in the field of international relations. The study of idealism can be traced back to the work of nineteenth century scholar Immanuel Kant. Idealism can be stated as the philosophy that examines current situations in the world and seeking ways in which it can be improved in the future (Kegley 2009). Needless to say, there exist variations to this school of thought that has evolved over time, two such strains are, Utopia-

The book World Order by Henry Kissinger offers an opportunity for the promotion of the understanding of the ground of international harmony and of the global disorder. The book is seeking to answer the question concerning the factors that contribute to the establishment of the world order and determine the relations on the international level. The chapters of the book are devoted to different issues that create in combination a common picture regarding the modern world order. In the Chapter 6 of

POSITION PAPER Dora Kardos, ELTE International Studies BA Organized hypocrisy in nineteenth-century East Asia The main point of Stephen Krasner’s paper on the nineteenth-century East Asia is that the world of international relations has always been permeated by organized hypocrisy, a special behaviour of states in which they pretend to compel to the norms of their countries while actually acting according to what is best for their material interests. As Krasner states and later explains “in general

Internal Dimensions The internal dimensions of a theory act as guidelines to describe a theory to enhance understanding of the approaches used to evolve it and in identifying gaps in the theory (Meleis, 2018). The first dimension is the rationale on which the theory is built (Meleis, 2018). The components of the theory of self-transcendence are united in a chain-link and it is based on certain sets of relationships that are deduced from a small set of basic principles and are therefore hierarchical

the ruling class control all the power and use it to undermine and exploit the working class. He accepts the importance of the state but argues that the state promotes ruling classes’ interests in order to keep the wealthy pleased. Marx and Weber’s theories begin to differ on the topic of stratification also. Weber introduced the concept of ‘status groups’ which conflict with classes due to the fact that they’re based around communities. The Weberian outlook is that all societies can be divided into

Many international relation scholars use the three main schools of thought, realism, liberalism and constructivism, to understand and analyze states’ behaviors in the international arena. Each of the three theories uniquely explains the reasons behind a state’s behavior in times of peace or during a conflict. Realism is the school of thought that believes that the international system is anarchic and thus the states try to gain material power. On the other hand liberalism focuses on the power of

Textualism, as Antonin Scalia describes it, is inconsistent in its nature. While he first claims that a good textualist would never interpret the law with the legislator’s intent in mind, Scalia later violates his own convictions by allowing for corrections of Scrivener’s errors. In principle, correcting Scrivener’s errors requires the judge to think about what the original writer meant to say with the statute, not the literal meaning of the text. This may mean adding a single additional word to