Realism or Idelaism

532 Words3 Pages
International relations can be analyzed using one of the two major perspectives – Realism or Idealism. Compare and contrast the key assumptions of the two perspectives. In your opinion which perspective provides a better framework to understand the current international system? Realism is the view that world politics is driven by competitive self-interest, and thus supports the view that the relations between nation states is a competitive struggle to preserve or improve its military, economic and social well-being. (Rourke 2008, 20) The key assumptions associated with realism involved a pessimistic view of the human condition which parallels Thomas Hobbes pattern “man is endemically bad”. Because of this competitive international relationship and the negative view on the nature of man, the assumption is that the international system is an anarchical state, absent and incapable of any central rule. This assumption leads to a foreign policy centered around a balance of power. Conversely, Idealism (or Liberalism) contends that people and the countries that represent them are capable of finding mutual interest in cooperating to achieve them. (Rourke 2008, 23) Idealism, with a decisively positive view on the morality and ideality of individuals and states contend that win-win agreements can be reached; that the goals of one actor can be reached without sacrificing the goals of another. The cooperative aspect of this model leads an international relation of shared dependence; whereby no state can operate wholly independently because all actions will have impacts outside borders that will, through a series of effects, affect that states own dependencies. Although both perspectives recognize an anarchical international system, Idealism asserts that there is a natural central rule (collectivity, as well IGOs) that states act in accordance. The Idealist perspective
Open Document