Thucydides and Waltz: Comparison - Essay Example

Compare & Contrast Thucydides and Waltz under the following headings; Human Nature, and War Thucydides Thucydides is known as the Greek historian of ancient times. He is accredited with the honor of being labeled as the father of scientific history. Add to that, there has been a connection of him with the realism in the political perspective. This realism focuses on the aspects which are related with interstate relations which have more emphasis on the aspects of power rather than what is termed as right at a particular moment in time. Thucydides was of the view that the interaction which was from a strategic angle not only discussed the recurrent set pattern but was also hailed as one which was apparent to say the least. This thinking was developed in the wake of the Peloponnesian War, a war that literally shook the inner parts of the different Greek city structures and foundations as a matter of fact. His view was that a change in the hierarchy of system with regards to the weaker areas did not have such an effect on the prevalent system within that place but had a certain amount of intolerance as well as commotion as far as the hierarchy of order was concerned, one that related with the stronger states. This meant that the disturbance actually played quite a fair deal in changing the overall stability of the system as a result. According to him, the war became quite a certainty due to the fact that growth of Athenian power was having its toll on the people and more so related with the fear aspects of the Spartan inhabitants. View concerning State As far as international relations are concerned, Thucydides holds the view that his realism is somewhat having quite a strong impact on the overall perception thus created by the analysts, one that discusses the international relations as a result. Thus these analysts made up for the modern day thinking ideologies and similar mindsets. As political scientists study the work of Thucydides, they come to the conclusion that there has been an endeavor to communicate the silent universals which did their bit at serving the exact basis for the foreign policy which was present within America at the time and not to forget the teaching doctrines which were in direct perspective of the post World War II period. Thucydides can actually be credited as the first person who made use of words like anarchic and immoral when one spoke of the regime of international relations and the related concepts that came along with it. Thucydides’ view was given complete significance in the wake of the ‘Melian Dialogue’ which spoke of his testament towards the absence of regulation and equality or justice when the talk went out loud about interstate politics. This meant that he did not concern his definition solely on the aspects of provision of rights and morals; rather he termed regulation of policies and justice for all as the buzzwords amongst the prevalent regimes and governmental instruments, which were indeed the state machinery subjects. The Melian controversy thus provides for the reasoning that is there for the Athenian attacks of the small island of Melos in the year 416. This made a statement which was big enough since it discussed the fact that those who have power and authority need not be brought to justice as they can single handedly ruin the poor, deprive them of their belongings and do what none other can actually think of. This also included basic human rights issues, no regard for justice at all and lastly, having complete disrespect for the individual’s gods. Thucydides’ work left some impact on the scholars of the Cold War era as they brought in evidence for the relevance which was present for the realist theory in the present times. View concerning War His work also lays the basis for the American diplomacy which was present in the times of the Cold War and not to forget the struggle which was seen by one and all in the wake of the rift between the two superpowers of the world. The moral results that came due to this tussle are accounted for as well as the problems raised from time to time which are in relation with the smaller states which were basically tied up in the whirlpool of bipolar competition. Thus Thucydides’ work testifies for the presence of the very same. It was during the polarization of the Cold War that the policy drafters and decision makers present at the helm of affairs equated America’s power to Athens’ glory found in the ancient times which was pretty much made apparent in the Peloponnesian War. It was during the Cold War that the deductions were made in the light of the work of Thucydides where he extensively researched on aspects concerning power and competition in settings which were related with bipolar systems to say the least. The modern day meaning of the Peloponnesian War has made it clear for the realists to understand the issue related with the security confusion which was present at the time. This security confusion is in essence defined as the power of a state which is subordinate right from the onset and which is in a relatively stable international regime and for that matter increases it in disproportionate measures. The same is brought into a position of conflict when we speak of the dominant states so as to speak and hence complete the definition thus provided. The result of the study on the Peloponnesian War accounted for an understanding on the part of Thucydides who stated that there was a marked difference between the different political modes present in a prevalent system as well as the make up of the political interaction which was made available for one and all to see and bear witness to, concerning the different states. View concerning Human Nature Thucydides views the rationale as to how much the human nature can be enticing in its entirety. His premise is that the human nature is the fundamental reason for the different events which have happened in the past however he disclaims the fact that there is any relation whatsoever with the gods or the relation of luck with the very same. Thus he makes sure that there is a rational analysis to his rationale which has been provided for the definition and the eventual and meaning description of the human nature. It takes into account all the activities and reasons which actually form up as the significant ones in the wake of relating them with historical events and the like. This rational analysis also outlines the manner in which human nature can be so very useful at understanding the different facets of the past and the manner in which that very past played its due role at changing the future. The relation is one that is symbiotic as it benefits at both the ends in entirety. His vision is pretty much clear when we speak of the human nature and life in general as the rationale provided is one that focuses significantly on the mannerisms which could be nothing short of being labeled as the very best. However, on the part of Thucydides, he also raises some doubts where the shortcomings of the human nature and life are raised. He states that life and indeed the nature of the man can start having degenerating effects when exposed to stress and tension and thus this can spoil the whole mental fabric of the person under discussion and not to forget his life which gets disturbed nonetheless. Waltz Kenneth Waltz is one of the most significant scholars who have done a lot of work in the international relations subject. Waltz is remarked as the founder of neorealism, better known as structural realism, coming directly under the international relations theory. Indeed this is the most important contributions that he has made to the international relations regime. Realism speaks of the posits which are there with the relation of the states’ actions as being pretty foreseen and hence understandable by mere virtue that takes into concern the issues of power position in contrast to other states and coming directly under the broader definition of a single international system. View concerning State Waltz’s stance towards a state is that, under the realism angle, a state has to make sure of some primary objectives which have to be achieved no matter what happens. These include the grabbing of power or in much more broader terms, the attainment of security that could be accounted for the military power as well as the persuasion which has had in the name of politics. His reasoning fathoms the fact that the world exists in a state of anarchy at all times, notwithstanding whether good or bad. This means that there is a state of perpetual global anarchy and one that can literally shake off the best of situations. It also accounts for the differing and changing circumstances which can take place in such an anarchic regime that the world is actually seeing. The anarchy thus shown is pretty different from the one which is present in the domestic scene as in the latter; all actors can appeal and thus be compelled to a central body for that matter. This central body would indeed be the government of the state or the area which we are speaking about in detail. On the other hand, in an international interest, no such working group or body is possible and thus as Waltz states, the states need to devise a mannerism in which they can help each other and more than help their own selves. Their role would be one that is freely accessible to one and all and accountable on the part of every body that is constituted in the name of finding out details related with their workings and activities. Furthermore, Waltz claims that globalization plays a significant role in the realm of the states, however he is of the belief that globalization cannot actually take over the role and reverse the very same on the part of the states to other non state actors so as to speak. The non state actors can never really balance the whole equation since they do not qualify as the active players of the state machinery. He terms globalization as being a fad of the 1990s and on the same token, he has asserted the fact with proper rational analysis that globalization has only benefited the state regime all these years since the role and responsibility of the state has increased manifolds not only in terms of its functions but also when we speak of the various responses raised in the light of the ever changing global transformations. View concerning War Waltz’s views related with war describe his theory’s status quo rationale right from the onset. As he speaks that there are as such no available causes within the regime of war that are present. This means that Waltz thinks of war as something which would not be caused by some trigger movements. He does not think that a war brings in any benefits for anyone concerned at any possible stage within it. In fact he is pretty much in opposition to having a war in the first place, thus answering a lot of questions which could be raised in the wake of his understanding related with war and the eventual view that is formed up as a result. The points that he raises in the discussion related with war are that they are caused due to miscalculation by one party or the other and more than that there is an uncertain nature which finds its way and does the trick in a negative manner nonetheless. His view is pretty valid since his assertion is that if the states knew any better, they would not start a war and thus remain friends with each other for all good times and bad. Thus in all fairness, Waltz’s views related with war suggest that he is pretty much in opposition to the same right from the onset and thus his explanations are more than adequate when the talk goes out loud at providing sound reasons as to why and how the wars could be avoided. It is only when they are badly needed that the whole question comes into the equation and then the war mongers need to understand the view given by Waltz and leave it to their own whims to follow what he has already said or go with the flow which is more in line with their ego and nothing else. View concerning Human Nature In relation with the viewpoint of Waltz concerning human nature, we see that Waltz did indeed move the theoretical basis for the cause of the security problem to a step further, one that encompassed the nature of the global system more than the very nature of human beings. This means that his significance has been at providing a more incisive and deep meaning to the international system of the time and less considerate towards the human beings as a result. Going further into this viewpoint, we find out that Waltz thinks of the miseries on the part of the human nature as being something that is the product of those very natures and not anything else, which is a quite interesting proposition to say the least. He thinks that the root of all bad things is man alone and nothing in this world is more evil than the human being itself. Man leads to the death and destruction of other mortals on earth through his most liked and cherished possession which is known as the war and irregular and abundant use of this weapon has left the world at crossroads with problems, troubles, miseries and what not all around. Thus the explicit claims that have been raised by world’s renowned politicians have been somewhat minimized in tone and content ever since Waltz discussed the same in a much broader vein and brought to light the plus points as well as the minuses so that everyone could come to terms with what is right, what is mediocre and what should be considered absolutely pathetic right from the onset. War is not only a manifestation of the human nature but it is also something that he loves to pass on to other people who are also a part of this very world and have equal rights to live in peace and prosperity for all that they care. The hub of all the evil as brought forward by Waltz is no one else other than the man and his nature is something that is not forgiven that easily by Waltz. This is pretty true since non living creatures which includes the bombs, tanks and other weapons cannot explode on their own until and unless the human beings present on the face of this earth decide to defeat and thus humiliate each other for one motive or the other. BIBLIOGRAPHY Kemos, Alexander. The Influence of Thucydides in the Modern World. Found Online at: http://www.hri.org/por/thucydides.html Alker, Howard R. (1988). The Dialectical Logic of Thucydides’ Melian Dialogue. American Political Science Review Vol. 82 Hooker, Richard. (1999). Thucydides. Ancient Greece. Found Online at: http://wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/THUCY.HTM Thucydides. Found Online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thucydides Mearsheimer, John J. (2002). Liberal Talk, Realist Thinking. University of Chicago Magazine. Found Online at: http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0202/features/index.htm Kenneth Waltz. Found Online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Waltz Globalization and Governance. (1999). Columbia University. Found Online at: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/walglob.htm Man, the State and War. (2001). A Theoretical Analysis. Columbia University Press. Found Online at: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/cup/catalog/data/023112/0231125372.HTM Word Count: 2,513 Read More