Published on

The Globalization of World Politics
Theories of World Politics
Baylis and Smith

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. “Power” man’s control over the minds andactions of other men Relational Power – directed towards something or someone Relative Power – considers the other actors capabilities“Survival” precondition for attaining other goalsAnarchic” absence of an overarching central authority
  2. 2. Proponents of “Raison de tat”Dual Moral Standards One Moral Standard for individual citizens living inside the state Different standard for the state in its external relations with other states
  3. 3.  Thucydides: Peloponnesian War  International Law is driven by an endless struggle for power that has its roots in human nature  Median Dialogue: The strong will do what it has the power to do and the weak accept what it has to accept
  4. 4.  Machiavelli: The Prince  Political realism recognizes that principles are subordinate to policies  The end justifies the means  It is better to be feared than loved
  5. 5.  Morgenthau: Politics among nations  Politics is governed by laws that are created by human nature  The main signpost of political realism is the concept of interest defined in terms of power
  6. 6.  Thucydides Representation of power politics as a law of human behavior Drive for power and will to dominate are held to be fundamental aspects of human nature Human Nature explains International Politics Nature for man: competition, fear, and war explained The Struggle for belonging, a struggle is often violent
  7. 7.  Rousseu: The State of War  It is not human nature but the anarchical system that factors fear, jealousy, suspicion Waltz: Theory of International Politics  States maximize their securities  Polarities: unipolarity, bipolarity, multipolarity Mersheimer: Tragedy of great power  States maximize their powers
  8. 8.  Security competition and inter-state conflict to the lack of an overarching authority above states that have relative distribution of power in the international system Waltz-> security maximizers Mersheimer-> no satisfied status quo: he argues that states recognizes that the best path to peace is to accumulate more power Bipolarity-> nuclear weapons to preserve peace Multipolarity->competition
  9. 9.  Zakaria: From Wealth to Power  Actions of States can be explained by: ▪ Systematic variables ▪ Cognitive variables ▪ Domestic variables Bring individual and unit variation back into the theory One important intervening variables is leaders themselves namely how they perceive the international distribution of power
  10. 10.  STATISM  sovereign states are the primary actors SURVIVAL  the pre-condition for attaining all other goals SELF-HELP  No other state can be relied on
  11. 11.  Relationships: Zero-sum (Relative gains)  My gain is your loss  Characterized by competition Concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of highly centralized government often extending to government ownership of industry
  12. 12.  Distinguishing trait= “sovereignty”  State has supreme authority to make and enforce laws  Moves of the state ▪ Organize power domestically ▪ Accumulate power internationally
  13. 13.  State power is challenged from above and below States are unable to respond to collective global problems Realism does not explain the existence of non-state actors
  14. 14.  The pre-eminent goal in international politics  This involves conquest or merely independence DEFENSIVE OFFENSIVE Kenneth Waltz Who? John Mersheimer Security Goal of State? PowerThe existence of status quo What now? Competition is always powers lessens the present competition for power
  15. 15.  Dual Moral Standard  One moral standard for an individual citizens living inside the state and a different moral standard for the state in its external relations with other states Ethnic Responsibility  Machiavelli  Individual acts of an immoral kind might have to be performed for the greater good
  16. 16. Are there no limits to what actions a state can take in the name of the greater good?
  17. 17.  Under anarchy, security can only be realized through self-help  Security dilemma (Spiral of power)  Absence of trust in international relationsDOMESTIC POLITY INTERNATIONAL SYSTEMCitizens do not have to defend There is no higher authority tothemselves prevent and counter the use of force
  18. 18.  Self-help is not an inevitable consequence of anarchy Historical and contemporary security  examples where: ▪ States have preferred collective security systems or forms of regional security systems ▪ NATO, UN with a common goal of security