This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Is Realism Dead? Ethan Kapstein Introduction:- argues that structural realism must be viewed as deeply and fatally flawed- argue that structural realism will not die as the cornerstone of international relations theory until an alternative is developed that takes its place- questions whether these have works simply led us into a period of theoretical "crisis," in which the discipline finds itself dissatisfied with existing theories but as yet unable to construct new ones? * disclaimer: the failure of a theory to solve problems does not necessarily spell its demise. Anomalies occur all the time in nature that existing theories have difficulty explaining In Search of Theory:- in order to replace structural realism with theories of domestic politics they must be able not only to falsify it but also to articulate an explicit model of how a given set of domestic factors can produce particular international outcomes the most important being war and peace- two major approaches for exploring the problem of how states behave with respect to their external environment 1. privileges the autonomous nature of the anarchic international system and focuses on the pressures that it places on every nation-state the foreign policies of states are best explained as a rational response to these external pressures 2. there is no objective international system with an independent existence- argue that a multipolar world of liberal states would be more peaceful than a multipolar world consisting of different regime types, some of which are non-liberal - short, regime type is a more significant determinant of international relations than polarity, or...
View Full Document
- Spring '09
- International Relations