Views on the International System and International Conflict - Assignment Example

 Introduction International System and International Conflict are major concerns of the study of international relations. However, these two concepts have both competing and alternative paradigms and theories which try to enumerate their concern with the international relations (Shimko 38). Basically, theories of international relations contains analytical component involving explanation of why things work the way they do, and a prescriptive element dictating what should be done. In summary, the main aim of study of international relations is for political scientist to think of what needs to be done to reduce armed conflict (prescription) and this depends on why he or she thinks war exists in the first place (the explanation) (Shimko 38). Failure by different international relations to agree about explanations for, and possible solutions to, critical external problems calls for more intense study of the international relations. However, this paper is going to critically evaluate the arguments of Realism, Liberalism, Constructivism and Marxism and their views on the International System and International Conflict. Realism Realism is one of the most influential perspectives of international relations especially in the United States since the end of World War II (Shimko 39). Realism has its intellectual roots in the conservative social and political philosophy. Therefore, in quest to have it’s deeper understanding, it’s important to appreciate its conservative foundations. Pessimistic view of human nature is one of the critical elements of social and political philosophy. This element holds the view that people are flawed, imperfect, and imperceptible creatures. Human nature is a mix of good and bad features, and the latter can never be completely eliminated (Shimko 40). The other element of a conservative social and political philosophy is a view of people and social creatures, meaning that people are driven to identify with and belong to social groups. People do not want to be isolated, unattached beings (Shimko 40). People are not individualistic, they drive a great sense of belonging and comfort from their groups and social identities. The other element of conservative social and political philosophy is a belief in the inevitable social conflict. People and groups will always find themselves in conflict with others. This is because group or collective egoism is one of the irrational sources of conflict. For example, when people and groups believe that they are not merely different but also better than others; this becomes a recipe for conflict (Shimko 41). However, realism also argues that it is possible to create a social, economic, and political order that benefits every person and every group. In the society, there are people and groups that benefit from the existing status quo while there are others that benefit from changing the status quo, and they’ll always conflict with the ones with the existing order. All in all, realists are of the view that the only way to solve the problem of conflict by the international communities is by creation of a world government. However, realists have focused on other ways of reducing international conflict since creation of a world government is technically impossible. They have focused on more modest solutions such as balance of power. When nations find themselves in a conflict, realists have argued that the chances of the wars to lessen are only if the parties in conflicts have relatively equal powers. This is so because nations are likely to anticipate wars because they expect to win, not to lose. On the same note, nations are likely to anticipate victory when they are more powerful than their opponents. Thus, when the two sides are equal, neither of the sides will be confident of victory, so neither is likely to initiate war (Shimko 42). Liberalism According to Kaarbo and Lee Ray 15, Liberalism is a social and political philosophy that began to flourish as Europe emerged from the medieval world that existed from the fall of Roman Empire. Liberalism is a conception of man as desiring freedom and capable of exercising rational free choice (Kaarbo and Lee Ray 16). It is also a perspective of social institutions as open to rational reconstruction in the light of individual needs. Lastly, it is a view of history as progressively perfectible through the continuous application of human reason to social institutions. Liberalism views people as essentially rational, ethical, and moral creatures capable of controlling their baser impulses (Kaarbo and Lee Ray 17). Liberalism sees acts of immoral and irrational behaviors as a result of ignorance and lack of understanding, which can be overcome through education and reforming social and political institutions. Liberals believe that it is possible to create a social, political and economic order that benefit everybody; an order that maximizes individual freedom and economic prosperity. Unlike realists who look at the world and focus on conflicts of interests and clashes that result, liberals are more drawn to the common interests that people and nations share and the prospects for cooperative activities that will satisfy these interests (Kaarbo and Lee Ray 19). Marxism Marx was mainly concerned with describing and analysing the internal dynamics of capitalist societies. Although Marxism is the product of Marx himself, Marxism vie of international relations is as a result of attempts by subsequent thinkers. Given the world in which we live today, it is not surprising that Marx saw class division and conflict as the defining feature of capitalist society, though this was not unique to exploit the states and people of the weak and powerless periphery (Anieri 112). Whether one labels the division as core versus periphery, haves versus have nots, the underlying reality remains the same. Marxists focus on understanding the institutions and processes that sustain what they see as an unequal, exploitative, and unjust international order. This is as opposed to liberals and realists who focus on question of war and peace. Whether it is states, quasi-state actors or non-state actors, Marxist analysis always returns to the central reality and problems- understanding the role these actors play in maintaining and perpetuating an equal and exploitive global capitalist order (Anieri 115). Constructivism Constructivism attempts to apply the concepts of beliefs, social norms and identities to understanding why states and other international actors behave as they do (D'Anieri 38). Constructivists’ theories of international relations argue that states seek to behave in accordance with the norms relevant to their identities. According to this theory, one reason why not a single theory of international relations has never been adequate is that nations modify their behavior in face of experience and theory (Shimko 42). If statesmen believe that the balance of power must determine their policies, they will act in such a way as to validate the theory. Constructivism views the course of international relations as an interactive process in which ideas and communications among agents serve to create structures (D'Anieri 40). These structures, in turn influence the ideas and communications of the agents. Constructivists reject the idea by realists and liberals that most of the actors of the world politics such as states and structures are a stable given. According to constructivists, political structures are mental pictures of what they are. Conclusion According to the four theories of international relations discussed, it is evident that the overall goal of these theories is to analyse the concepts of international systems and conflicts. However, though they differ in different ways, the most important thing is their arguments offered in order to understand these concepts. Works cited: Anieri, Paul. International politics: power and purpose in global affairs. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2012. D'Anieri, Paul. International politics: power and purpose in global affairs. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2012. Kaarbo, Juliet and Lee Ray James. Global politics. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2010. Shimko, Keith. International relations: perspectives and controversies. [Belmont, CA]: Wadsworth/Cengage, cop. 2009. Read More