• Chapter 3
Middle Earth and
Three Great Debates
in International Relations
The Great Debates
in International Relations
1st Great Debate (20s & 30s)
2nd Great Debate (50s-80s)
3rd Great Debate (80s & on)
The 1st
Great Debate
Classical Realism
Classical Liberalism
Visions
of the future
Marxism
CLASSICAL
REALISM
• Humans are
eternally aggressive
• Conflict is the normal
state of the world
• Ends justify means
• States are primary
actors in the
international system
CLASSICAL
LIBERALISM
• People are inherently
good, so conflict can
be reduced through
social learning
• Conflict is not the norm,
but an aberration
• NGO’s & other nonstate actors play a
significant role in the
international system
MARXISM
• Focuses on conflict
among different
economic classes
• Social revolution
promotes greater
equality
• Trees in Fangorn resist
perceived efforts to
exploit them
English School
nd
2
The
Great Debate
Method:
History vs.
Science
Rational Choice
Neo-realism
Neo-liberalism
Neo-Marxism
English School
Focuses on “international
society” of states
Rational Choice
Unbounded Rationality
Actors “maximize
their interests”
through costbenefit analysis
Rational Choice
Bounded Rationality
Calculations are informed
by self-awareness and
psychological factors
Neo-Realism
Inter-state conflict is inevitable
because of anarchic structure of
international system
Key variable is
distribution of military power
Under anarchy, lack of overarching
power or government puts states into a
“security dilemma”
Defensive
Realism
States seek to increase
power only under certain
circumstances
Offensive Realism
States seek to increase
power to maximize their
security
Neo-Liberalism
Inter-state cooperation is feasible
Greater concentration on role of
international institutions in constraining
behavior and overcoming barriers
The more contact states have through
trade, investment, tourism, etc.,
the stronger the reciprocity
Neo-Marxism
Inter-state conflict is inevitable because of
anarchic structure of international system
Key variable is
distribution of military power
Under anarchy, lack of
overarching power or government
puts states into a “security dilemma”
Gramscian
Dependency
World Systems
rd
3
The
Great Debate
Positivism
Constructivism
How
knowledge
is acquired
Critical Theory
Constructivists
Emphasizes role of socially constructed
ideas in shaping International Relations
Without a perceived security threat, warlike
behavior isn’t considered
and the “norm” is peace
Constructed worlds can constrain behavior
in international politics
Critical Theory
Questions rationalist state-centric
framework and research agenda
Focuses on alternative issues and
marginalized populations
Argue that normative concerns should be
included in International Relations
Where is IR
theory now?