Introduce and Critique Classical Realism

Introduce and Critique Classical Realism

     Realism is one of several theoretical approaches in the study of international relation. Realists claim that the intellectual roots of the theory can be traced back to the fifth century BC. Thucydides, considered to be one of the forefathers of the theory, described and analysed the Peloponnesian Wars in an inherently realist fashion. However to state that Thucydides was a realist would be untrue; other early writers such as Machiavelli, Hobbes, Carr and Weber are also bought under this same umbrella of academics who wrote in a realist way but who themselves were not Realists.^[1] Even though the roots of Realism can be traced back to the Fifth century BC, it was not until almost 2500 years later, in the 1930s and 1940s, that the paradigm was considered as a theoretical approach to understanding international relations.  The birth of modern day realism as a paradigm can be attributed mainly to one man, Hans J Morgenthau. Who, in his 1948 work ‘Politics among Nations’ clearly outlined an approach to international relations that is defined as the classical Realist theory.

     Morgenthau made assumptions that were amalgamated with the assumptions of other earlier scholars into six key principles that have come to define classical realism. Morgenthau’s first principle was that politics, ‘like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their roots in human nature’ and since human nature does not change it is acceptable to say that the objective laws that govern politics do not change. The second principle is that ‘the main signpost that helps political realism to find its way through the landscape of international politics is the concept of interests defined as power’ meaning that a politician will act in a way as to increase either the power of the state or his own personal power. This point also separates politics from other topics considered to be non-political such as economics, ethics, aesthetics and religion, promoting a measure of systemic order in international relations. Thirdly, ‘realists assume that its key concept of interests defined as power is an objective category which is universally valid’. Power to a realist can manifest itself in many different forms and so can the methods used by statesmen in attempting to attain them. The different forms taken depend largely on the political and social climate at the time but the inherent desire for power is always evident in politics regardless of the timeframe.  Furthermore, ‘Realism maintains that universal moral principles cannot be applied to the actions of states in their abstract universal formulation, but that they must be filtered through the concrete circumstances of time and place.’ In the eyes of a realist a state cannot be a moral entity or it will not be able to survive. Morgenthau’s fifth principle is that a realist ‘will refuse to identify the moral aspirations of a particular nation with the moral laws that govern the universe’. A classical realist will not analyse two separate ideologies or the moral interests of two states in a bias few, neither will be considered dominant or superior. Finally he refers to how the ‘political realist is not unaware of the existence and relevance of standards of thought other than political ones but as a political realist, he cannot but subordinate these other standards to those of politics.’^[2] A Classical realist has a negative few of human nature and subsequently a negative few of the states in international relations. States are said to exist in an anarchic world order as a result of all states being inherently selfish, with the sole desire to increase their own power.