This essay will analyse the question whether critical theory provides a more intellectually satisfying approach to the study of international relations than realism – or if realism offers a more useful guide for political action. One could also ask: is there still a need for realism today?
In order to establish a basis for further examination, this essay will sketch out realist thought and critical theory in international relations. This will be followed by a case study, which will reflect the suitability of both approaches in the Ukraine crisis. This essay does not attempt to offer an extensive analysis of the conflict but will discuss how realist and critical prisms shape the perception of this conflict. Finally, it will question if the theories offer practical guidance for political action.
Realism and liberalism are the classic theories in the studies of international relations. In the last decades, these traditional ideas have been challenged by new ideas such as social constructivism, post-positivism and a variety of marxist theories. One of the neo-marxist approaches to international relations is critical theory.
In his well-received article “Social forces, states, and world orders” Robert W. Cox used the distinction between critical theory and “problem solving theory” to distinguish critical theory from traditional approaches to the study of international relation. At first sight, this seems to implicate that critical theory is not interested in problem-solving.
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Realism
- Classical Realism
- Neorealism
- Contemporary Realism
- Critical Theory
- The Ukraine crisis through the lens of Realism
- The Ukraine crisis through the lens of Critical Theory
- Conclusion
Objectives and Key Themes
This essay examines whether Critical Theory offers a more intellectually satisfying approach to studying international relations than Realism, and conversely, whether Realism provides a more practical guide for political action. It explores the theoretical underpinnings of both Realism and Critical Theory within the context of international relations.
- Comparison of Realism and Critical Theory in international relations
- Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each approach
- Examination of the applicability of each theory to real-world situations, specifically the Ukraine crisis
- Assessment of the practical implications of each theoretical framework for political decision-making
- Evaluation of the continued relevance of Realism in contemporary international relations
Chapter Summaries
Introduction: This introductory chapter lays out the central question of the essay: whether Critical Theory provides a more intellectually fulfilling approach to studying international relations than Realism, or if Realism is ultimately more useful for guiding political action. It briefly introduces Realism and Liberalism as classic theories, noting the challenges posed by newer perspectives like social constructivism, post-positivism, and various Marxist theories, including Critical Theory. The chapter establishes the essay's structure, outlining its approach to examining both theoretical frameworks and their application to the Ukraine crisis as a case study. The introduction highlights the essay's intent to assess the practical guidance each theory offers for political action, without delving into extensive analysis of the conflict itself.
Realism: This chapter delves into the multifaceted nature of Realism, describing it as a family of ideas with shared assumptions. It highlights the core tenets of Realism, including its focus on the sovereign state as the primary actor, the emphasis on self-preservation and self-help as driving forces, and a skepticism towards supranational organizations in the post-Westphalian era. The chapter explores different schools of thought within Realism, differentiating between Classical Realism, with its focus on human nature and the inherent pursuit of power, and Neorealism, which emerged as a response to challenges to the dominant realist worldview in the 1970s. The discussion emphasizes the historical context and the evolution of Realism as a response to changing international dynamics. Specific examples of thinkers and texts associated with each branch are provided.
Keywords
Realism, Critical Theory, International Relations, Ukraine Crisis, Classical Realism, Neorealism, State Sovereignty, Self-help, Power Politics, Problem-solving Theory, Political Action
Frequently Asked Questions: A Comprehensive Language Preview
What is the main focus of this essay?
The essay's central question is whether Critical Theory provides a more intellectually satisfying approach to studying international relations than Realism, or if Realism is ultimately more useful for guiding political action. It compares and contrasts these two major theoretical frameworks within the context of international relations, analyzing their strengths and weaknesses and examining their applicability to real-world situations.
What are the key themes explored in the essay?
Key themes include a comparison of Realism and Critical Theory in international relations; an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each approach; an examination of their applicability to the Ukraine crisis; an assessment of their practical implications for political decision-making; and an evaluation of Realism's continued relevance in contemporary international relations.
What theoretical perspectives are examined?
The essay primarily focuses on Realism and Critical Theory. Within Realism, it distinguishes between Classical Realism, Neorealism, and contemporary variations. The essay also considers the challenges posed to traditional realist and liberal views by newer perspectives such as social constructivism, post-positivism, and various Marxist theories, including Critical Theory.
How does the essay apply these theories?
The Ukraine crisis serves as a case study to examine the practical implications of Realism and Critical Theory. The essay analyzes this crisis through the lens of both theories, assessing how each framework helps understand and interpret the events and their implications.
What is covered in the chapter on Realism?
The Realism chapter explores the multifaceted nature of Realism, presenting it as a family of ideas with shared assumptions. It details core tenets such as the focus on the sovereign state, self-preservation, self-help, and skepticism towards supranational organizations. The chapter differentiates between Classical Realism and Neorealism, highlighting their historical context and evolution in response to changing international dynamics.
What are the key takeaways from the introduction?
The introduction sets the stage by presenting the central research question and briefly introducing Realism and Liberalism as classic theories. It acknowledges the challenges posed by newer perspectives and outlines the essay's structure, focusing on the comparison of both theoretical frameworks and their application to the Ukraine crisis as a case study. It emphasizes the assessment of practical guidance offered by each theory for political action.
What are the key words associated with this essay?
Key words include: Realism, Critical Theory, International Relations, Ukraine Crisis, Classical Realism, Neorealism, State Sovereignty, Self-help, Power Politics, Problem-solving Theory, and Political Action.
What is the structure of the essay?
The essay follows a clear structure: an introduction, a chapter dedicated to Realism, a chapter incorporating Critical Theory's perspective on the Ukraine crisis (along with a comparative analysis of Realism's perspective on the same crisis), and a conclusion. The table of contents provides a detailed overview of the specific sections within each chapter.
- Citation du texte
- Aaron Faßbender (Auteur), 2017, The struggle for an intellectually satisfying path to action. Critical Theory and Realism in International Relations, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/355157
