Difference Between Realism And Realism

1780 Words8 Pages
Realism, winning the first great debate in the 1930’s has been the dominant theory in International Relations since its beginning. Realist argues that we should take the world as it really is rather that what we perceive to be idealistic. Realism holds that the state is its key component and that as an academic theory; it exists with the sole purpose of providing the science of international politics that could study the real laws and behaviours of mankind. The central idea of this theory is one of power and security, premised on the grounds that power play and violent resolutions are simply inevitable. Realism connotes independence through power for the greater good of national interest above human interest that justifies its reasoning for…show more content…
Classical Realism which again makes reference to Thucydides analysis of the power politics and human nature in the Peloponnesian war to identify that International politics is fundamentally about power. Classical Realist argues that “it is from the nature of man that the essential features of international politics, such as competition, fear, and war, can be explained. Hans Morgenthau, leading 20th century figure in the study of international politics states that “politics is ruled by objective laws” and that those laws are rooted in human nature. It was human greed and lust for power, according to him that underlined the dynamics of international politics, he therefore proposed that ethics are important yes, but state interests are more important. According to Thucydides and J. Morgenthau the essential continuity of the power-seeking behaviours of states are rooted in the biological facet of the human being. In my view classical realism is the perspective of the diplomat looking over the shoulder of the decision maker pushing them to function rationally, in a way that strategically places state interests over
Get Access