The three, major theories of international relations are realism and liberalism: Realism Realism focuses on the notion that states work to increase their own power relative to other states.
The theory of realism states that the only certainty in the world is power; therefore, a powerful state—via military power the most important and reliable form of power —will always be able to outlast its weaker competitors.
Self-preservation is a major theme in realism, as states must always seek power to protect themselves. In realism, the international system drives states to use military force. Although leaders may be moral, they must not let morality guide their foreign policy. Furthermore, realism recognizes that international organizations and law have no power and force, and that their existence relies solely on being recognized and accepted by select states. Liberalism Idealism Liberalism recognizes that states share broad ties, thus making it difficult to define singular independent national interests.
The theory of liberalism in international relations therefore involves the decreased use of military power. The theory of realism began to take shape in the s as increasing globalization, communications technology, and international trade made some scholars argue that realism was outdated.
Liberal approaches to the study of international relations, also referred to as theories of complex interdependence, claim that the consequences of military power outweigh the benefits and that international cooperation is in the interest of every state.
It also claims that exercising economic power over military power has proven more effective. Although the liberal theory of international relations was dominant following World War I while President Woodrow Wilson promoted the League of Nations and many treaties abolishing war, realism came back into prominence in the Second World War and continued throughout the Cold War. Proponents such as Maria Chattha argue that states will cooperate irrespective of relative gains, and are thus concerned with absolute gains.
Neoliberalism also contains an economic theory that is based on the use of open and free markets with little, if any, government intervention to prevent monopolies and other conglomerates from forming. It makes the assumption that the economy trumps other concerns; allowing for the elevation of class as the focus of study. Marxists view the international system as an integrated capitalist system in pursuit of capital accumulation.
Thus, the period of colonialism brought in sources for raw materials and captive markets for exports, while decolonialization brought new opportunities in the form of dependence. Concepts in international relations Sovereignty Preceding the concepts of interdependence and dependence, International Relations relies on the idea of sovereignty.
Sovereignty as being a state, that the sovereign power s have absolute power over their territories, and that such a power is only limited by the sovereign's "own obligations towards other sovereigns and individuals. It is often divided up into the concepts of hard power and soft power, hard power relating primarily to coercive power, such as the use of force, and soft power commonly covering economics, diplomacy and cultural influence. However, there is no clear dividing line between the two forms of power.
International relations is an interesting topic because it concerns peoples and cultures all over the world. The scope and complexity of the interactions among these groups make international relations a challenging subject to master.
Indeed, there is always more to learn. Memorizing the name of certain key texts and their authors Understanding and remembering certain provisions of the Indian constitution, their origins, significant dates, and timelines wrt the drafting of the constitution and certain landmark verdicts delivered by the Indian judiciary. Tracing certain quotations and ideas to their respective authors, thus familiarizing oneself with the respective vocabularies of major thinkers, like Aristotle, Mill, Ambedkar, etc, vis a vis Western and Indian Political Thought.
Will Kymlicka, Contemporary Political Philosophy. Chapters to read : Multiculturalism, Communitarianism. Rajeev Bhargara and Ashok Acharya same chapters as mentioned above, and same chapters. Note- This is an important area. Familiarize yourself with great clarity on all concepts mentioned above.
Also, try to focus on certain terminologies or concepts adopted by some thinkers. And cheerfully, this list would go on, that is, when it comes to exam Political Theory is not yet declined. The social and Political Thought of B. N Roy. Annihilation of Caste- Ambedkar. And original texts as mentioned above. Laxmikanth, 6th Edition Indian Polity. Note- Current issues are to be properly understood. Apart from this special focus must be given to Supreme Court Judgments whose list I will be sharing soon.
Chapters to read : Read on your own discretion. I would suggest go through Introduction once. And read Book Review if possible. Read the summary of both the books. Note- Again, this is an important area. Chapters to read : Read all the chapters relevant for UG level. Original texts: On Liberty by J. Mill; The Communist Manifesto by Marx. Note- This is an important section both classical and modern. Such a theoretical event was prompted by a few major developments: 1 the challenging persuasion of critical theorists by leading rationalists to move beyond meta-theoretical critique of rationalism and produce substantive theories of international relations; 2 the failure of neorealists and neoliberals to predict the end of the Cold War and the consequent challenge to explanatory and analytical capacities of their theories; 3 the emergence of a new generation of critical theory-inclined scholars who moved to explore the untapped potentials of theoretical and conceptual scholarship in international relations theory; and 4 the enthusiasm shown by disappointed rational choice-oriented theorists in IR to welcome alternative constructivist perspectives.
Constructivism is the view that the manner in which the material world shapes and is shaped by human action and interaction depends on dynamic normative and epistemic interpretations of the material world. More significantly, the meaning of material capabilities in terms of power is constructed on the basis of social interactions and shared understandings, that is, the latter give meaning to the former.
Identities and preferences of international actors, for constructivism, are shaped by the social structures that are not fixed or unchanging. Epitomized by the writings of John G. For Wendt,. Constructivism is a structural theory of the international system that makes the following core claims: 1 states are the principal units of analysis for international political theory; 2 the key structures in the states system are intersubjective rather than material; and 3 state identities and interests are in important part constructed by these social structures, rather than given exogenously to the system by human nature [as neo realists maintain] or domestic politics [as neoliberals favour].
Despite being a state-centrist scholar of international politics, Wendt criticizes neorealists and neoliberals for reifying the structure of states system and taking for granted its ontological and ideational properties, which precludes us from considering and assessing the potentials for structural and institutional change in the international politics.
This means that if we are interested in how the states system works, instead of how its elements are constructed, we will have to take the existence of states as given, just as sociologists have to take the existence of people as given to study how society works. However, concession of theoretical ground and employment of positivist methods to so theorize constructivism as Wendt does, have come under attack by interpretive, and in a different sense unit-level, constructivists.
Ultimately, among various strands of constructivism which look at international relations from nuanced perspectives and thus maintain differing foci, the constructivist theorizations of Richard Ned Lebow merit due attention. For it, it is states that make the international environment conflictual or cooperative.
0コメント