Understanding International Politics
- This is a preview of the essay.
To view the full text you must login!
Understanding International Politics
Throughout history anarchy has placed a certain amount of constraint on international politics. For years international scholars have tried to figure out whether realism or liberalism does a better job in explaining it. Although liberalists possess strong arguments, realism does a better job describing the restrictions that anarchy has on international politics. First, I will point out the differences between realist and liberal beliefs. After identifying these core differences, I will present evidence that shows why realism is superior to liberalism in understanding international politics.
There are three main beliefs that make up realism; the idea that military force is an important form of leverage needed in an anarchic world, states are the most important actors, and that anarchy constrains a states willingness to cooperate. In the anarchic world of international politics there is no police to protect states from others, therefore realists believe that each state needs to protect itself from other states. States use power to pursue their own interest; in realism states are worried about their own gains compared to other states. Realists consider states as the only actors in international politics, although states have many non-government organizations the ultimate power is held by the state itself. States act as individuals and are independent...