TOPIC: "By taking a look at literature in International Relations Theory, focus on these three traditions: realism, pluralism/liberalism, and cosmopolitanism/constructivism. There is much stability (no change) in these traditions, but there is also proof of growth and transformation through the years. By analyzing the history of all three, rank them, and explain which one has the most stability and which has had the most change."
--After doing extensive research, I'm having problem distinguishing the difference between the three traditions, for they are extremely similar. Please help me identify which tradition has had the least change and the most change throughout history.
In this research, we will focus on the study of International Relations Theory, specifically focusing on the three core traditions of realism, liberalism and constructivism. This brief research can only attempt to give the reader some insight and references into these topics as the overall study of International Relations Theory is extremely complex and a very vast topic to try and cover within the context of one research essay. For many students and practitioners who study international relations, this topic and the different theories have always been a source of great debate. Generally, classical realism has long been seen as the most venerable and persistent theory in international relations therefore, it is a good baseline for trying to evaluate and compare competing models (Ruth, 2014).
With that as our starting point, the intent of this research will be to cover the history and concepts that are a part of each specific tradition and then draw some comparison and conclusions based on the findings. The overall goal of this research is to try and rank these three disciplines by stability and determine which theory has had the most stability and which has seen the most evolution and change over the past several decades. We will begin by examining the theory of Realism.
Realism commonly defines a very particular viewpoint of the world or ones paradigm of how societies function based on some core assumptions. Realists commonly assume that the international atmosphere is anarchic and that it's made up of independent political entities called states. In realist theory, states are the primary subjects and they each will possess their own set of military capability and powers that can potentially make them a threat to other states and based on this threat, states will always be unsure of the others true intentions and distrust them because of their threat capability's. Realist believes that states are instrumentally rational and the basic motivator that drives each state is its maintenance of sovereignty and its overall strategy for survival (Kaufman, 2013).
Although historically, there have long been Americans such as Alexander Hamilton who have seen international relations through the realist perspective, the contemporary roots associated within realism are based largely upon intellectual European concepts with strong influences being noted during the interwar period from diplomat E.H. Carr, political theorist Hans Morgenthau, and geographer Nicholas Spykman. Other key European figures that had major contributions on forming the basis of realist thought include Raymond Aron, Martin Wight, John Herz, and Hedley Bull (Foley, 2009).
During this same period the notable Americans that subscribed to the same realistic point of view and theory included Norman Graebner, George Kennan, Reinhold Niebuhr, Arnold Wolfers, and journalist Walter Lippmann (Foley, 2009).
Even though realists have varying thoughts and concepts which do not represent pure homogeneity within the theory, they will commonly share a set of core principles views about international relations. These shared realism views are; to place a heavy focus on questioning what the causes of war and peace are within societies. In addition they believe that the framework and structure of an international system is a sufficient and necessary explanatory reason for the aspects of international relations. To further expand on this thought, classical realists believe in "structural anarchy" which refers to the absence in contemporary systems of a central authority to solve disputes and thus blame this lack of central authority for giving rise to the overall security dilemma in contemporary systems (Kaufman, 2013).
Realists believe that nations that adopt a self help system and strive for absolute security lead to all other states within the international system insecure based on this need for absolute security driving incentives for arms races, wars, or other hostile interactions between states .
So for realist the question of relative capabilities is a critical factor. It is the forces trying to deal with these factors within the ...
In depth research solution of more than 2,500 words in APA with references specifically analyzing Industrial Relation.