Cause-Effect Speech Assignment Sheet Due: March 20th (in-class): Typed Revised Preparation Outlines and speaking/keyword outlines, speech Format: A 5-6-minute speech delivered extemporaneously from limited notes, a printed full speech outline including a bibliography with at least 3 acceptable sources, and a limited visual aid Points: 150 (15% of Final grade). 110 for speech, 40 for outlines Purpose: This is one of our formal graded speeches this semester, and the cause-effect speech practices one of the most difficult but important skills in public speaking and argumentation. This speech aims to help you practice and develop causal reasoning and synthesizing a complex issue by choosing a topic you are interested in/passionate about and showing your audience a piece of the “chain of causality.” We will work specifically on the delivery skills of working with visual aids, projection, and vocal variety with this speech. We will integrate more rigorous research and the sorts of evidence that will help you build your credibility with an audience. Task: Your goal is to develop a 5-6 minute speech that compellingly and clearly argues that one trend/event has happened (or will happen) and that as a result of it another event/trend has happened or will happen. You should approach this speech in a few different steps. First, choose your topic. It should be something you are interested in and connects with your interests/focus in your studies. Do some initial “rummaging” research, where you learn the major parts of this topic and lay out pieces of the “chain of causality.” Second, you will want to supplement this by conducting additional research using books, periodicals, newspaper articles, and government websites where relevant. Third, you should develop your two-three main points. Fourth, you should place the research wherever it needs to go in the outline. Finally, practice your speech, and build your visual aid! Details: · The speech should be between 5-6 minutes in length. Speeches that exceed or fail to meet this requirement (other than a 30 second grace period) will be subject to a grade penalty · The speech must cite three acceptable sources (not webpages unless specifically cleared) in the form of books, journal articles or periodicals, newspapers, or government websites. Those must be cited orally in the speech itself and be cited in the body of the outline · The speech will go through multiple rounds of revision. You will create and bring a fully-drafted outline to class on 3/13, which will be worth points as your “draft outline.” It will be reviewed by me and by a peer. You will integrate that feedback to revise it into a “final outline” which you will turn in with your final speech. · The speech must not attempt to persuade us to act differently. You are arguing that one event cause or will cause another, not taking the additional step of saying that therefore we should change how we’re doing things. · The speech should be delivered ext ...

1. Cause-Effect Speech Assignment Sheet
Due: March 20th (in-class): Typed Revised Preparation Outlines
and speaking/keyword outlines, speech
Format: A 5-6-minute speech delivered extemporaneously from
limited notes, a printed full speech outline including a
bibliography with at least 3 acceptable sources, and a limited
visual aid
Points: 150 (15% of Final grade). 110 for speech, 40 for
outlines
Purpose: This is one of our formal graded speeches this
semester, and the cause-effect speech practices one of the most
difficult but important skills in public speaking and
argumentation. This speech aims to help you practice and
develop causal reasoning and synthesizing a complex issue by
choosing a topic you are interested in/passionate about and
showing your audience a piece of the “chain of causality.” We
will work specifically on the delivery skills of working with
visual aids, projection, and vocal variety with this speech. We
will integrate more rigorous research and the sorts of evidence
that will help you build your credibility with an audience.
Task:
Your goal is to develop a 5-6 minute speech that compellingly
and clearly argues that one trend/event has happened (or will
happen) and that as a result of it another event/trend has
happened or will happen. You should approach this speech in a
few different steps. First, choose your topic. It should be
something you are interested in and connects with your
interests/focus in your studies. Do some initial “rummaging”
research, where you learn the major parts of this topic and lay
out pieces of the “chain of causality.” Second, you will want to
supplement this by conducting additional research using books,
periodicals, newspaper articles, and government websites where
relevant. Third, you should develop your two-three main points.
Fourth, you should place the research wherever it needs to go in

2. the outline. Finally, practice your speech, and build your visual
aid!
Details:
· The speech should be between 5-6 minutes in length. Speeches
that exceed or fail to meet this requirement (other than a 30
second grace period) will be subject to a grade penalty
· The speech must cite three acceptable sources (not webpages
unless specifically cleared) in the form of books, journal
articles or periodicals, newspapers, or government websites.
Those must be cited orally in the speech itself and be cited in
the body of the outline
· The speech will go through multiple rounds of revision. You
will create and bring a fully-drafted outline to class on 3/13,
which will be worth points as your “draft outline.” It will be
reviewed by me and by a peer. You will integrate that feedback
to revise it into a “final outline” which you will turn in with
your final speech.
· The speech must not attempt to persuade us to act differently.
You are arguing that one event cause or will cause another, not
taking the additional step of saying that therefore we should
change how we’re doing things.
· The speech should be delivered extemporaneously from a
keyword outline rather than memorized, impromptu, or
manuscript.
Other things to know:
Choose something you care about and can talk about. This is a
great chance to learn new things about something that interests
you.
TAKE THE TIME to do good research. The library has great
resources to help you. I can help you, and we will even have a
visit from a librarian. Let your research guide your speech—
don’t create a full outline/argument and then go fishing for the
research you need (sometimes it doesn’t exist!)
This speech is tricky but valuable. It takes time to develop and
get right. Take the time.

3. Machiavelli
Development of INR – Week 3
Machiavelli
Who was Machiavelli? Why is he important for Political
Realism?
Florentine writer/diplomat between 1469-1527. Born in a
context of continuous crisis and warfare.
It was not uncommon, for example, for Popes themselves to lead
armies in Italy against other city-states – but especially against
Holy Roman Emperor.
Machiavelli experiences the unrelenting attempts by various
European powers to assert their hegemony in Northern Italy –
Chapter 26 of The Prince, is basically a call to the Medici to use
the opportunity of chaos in Italy to lead it towards unification
and glory.
Cont.
Wrote two main works, The Prince and The Discourses on Livy.
The latter is an extended commentary on Livy’s history of the
foundation and history of Rome until about 300 BC –
corresponds to the Third Samnite War.
The interest in The Discourse on Livy is also to contextualize
Machiavelli the writer of the Prince – concern with not just the
acquisition of power; but with the emergence and maintenance
of a republic during periods of crisis or political turbulence.
Machiavelli – A retrieval of a type of pagan knowledge of
politics.
A reemphasis on a non-eschatological temporality to understand
politics.
Virtù

4. Because of constant conflict the Prince needs to possess certain
qualities to ‘maintain his state’ and “increase his power’.
Virtù: possessing the knowledge and will to do what needs to be
done even if it may be considered evil.
The Prince must possess a “flexible disposition” (Chapter 18).
Implies an ability of adaptation to changing political
circumstances.
Fortuna
What undermines political order. Circumstances that can emerge
to undermine the Prince’s power or security.
Machiavelli: Fortuna is “one of our destructive rivers which,
when it is angry, turns the plains into lakes, throws down the
trees and buildings, takes earth from one spot, puts it in
another; everyone flees before the flood; everyone yields to its
fury and nowhere can repel it.”
Cont.
Machiavelli: “I conclude therefore that, fortune being changeful
and mankind steadfast in their ways, so long as the two are in
agreement men are successful, but unsuccessful when they fall
out. For my part I consider that it is better to be adventurous
than cautious, because fortune is a woman, and if you wish to
keep her under it is necessary to beat and ill-use her; and it is
seen that she allows herself to be mastered by the adventurous
rather than by those who go to work more coldly. She is,
therefore, always, woman-like, a lover of young men, because
they are less cautious, more violent, and with more audacity
command her.”
Sexualized Imagery: What does it imply?
Politics is not just about mastery; it’s also about foundation,
beginning, natality.
Catherine Zuckert: “The task of the price is not only to
dominate but also to create, to give life to a new being.”

5. Implications
Separation of God and Fortuna.
Medieval Theology: Fortuna is divine will; accounts for random
events; appears capricious because “men” don’t understand why
certain events happen.
Machiavelli: God is not important; we must master Fortuna with
virtù. “Man” and Fortuna make history.
Augustine and Francisco de Vitoria
Development of INR Week 2
Christianity
Christianity’s strength (its universality):
lack of interest with non-Christian notions of identity.
Paul: “There is neither Jew or Gentile, neither slave nor free,
nor is there male or female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”
(Galatians 3:28).
Augustine: World is made up of unnatural institutions (i.e.
slavery).
Slavery may be imposed on those that sin.
Christians must obey earthly law.
Augustine
Split between “right to go to war” (jus ad bellum) and “right
conduct in war” (jus in bello)
Augustine became one of the first to be concerned with the
question of war and peace and of what was permissible or not
during war from a Christian perspective.
How does one justify killing with the divine command: “Thou
shall not kill”?

6. “They who have waged war in obedience to the divine
command, or in conformity with His laws, have represented in
their persons the public justice or the wisdom of government,
and in this capacity have put to death wicked men…”
The central importance of law in defining the legitimacy of
violence:
Just War Theory: Jus ad Bellum
Right to go to War:
Just Authority: is the decision to go to war based on a
legitimate political and legal process? = State Sovereignty
Just Cause: Has a wrong been committed to which war is the
appropriate response?
Right Intention: Is the response proportional to the cause? Is
war an adequate response to righting a wrong? What about
issues concerning mission creep, for example?
Last Resort: Has every other means to right the wrong been
exhausted? No other option but war?
Vitoria
Vitoria (1486-1546): chair of law in Salamanca (Salamanca
School) – De Indis et De Jure Belli (On the American Indian)
What are the rights and obligations of the Spanish vis-à-vis the
Native American under universal law?
1) “By what right (ius) were the barbarians subjected to Spanish
rule?”
2) “What powers has the Spanish monarchy over the Indians in
spiritual and religious matters?”
3) “What powers has either the monarchy or the Church with
regards to the Indians in spiritual and religious matters?”
Colonialism in the New World
Genocidal: 50 million to 1.8 million (estimate); mainly as a

7. result of epidemics.
“The scale of the human obliteration was so massive that it
ushered in a shift in the makeup of the atmosphere….”
Beginning of the Anthropocene – increase in vegetation results
in carbon capture and cooling of the planet.
Extraordinarily violence: Encomienda System; Violent cruelty.
Vitoria Cont.
1) Native Americans are not slaves (against Sepulveda’s
argument following Aristotle). Implies the Spanish have no
right to their property.
Argues against four grounds: NA were sinners, unbelievers,
madmen or insensate (lacking reason/sensation).
They possess reason (even if they didn’t it wouldn’t change the
argument).
“Nor could it be their fault if they were for so many thousands
of years outside the state of salvation, since they were born in
sin but did not have the use of reason to prompt them to seek
baptism or the things necessary for salvation” (233) “their evil
and barbarous education.”
Vitoria Cont.
Under what circumstances may they be governed?
Law of Nation => must be humane to strangers. The right of
hospitality. “This would not be the case if travellers were doing
something evil by visiting foreign nations” (235).
Spanish travel is lawful.
Spanish may trade with NA as long as they do no harm.
NA cannot prevent the Spanish from visiting and trading.
Vitoria Cont.
If the NA reisist Spanish, Spanish have a right to defend
themselves (i.e. just cause).

8. “But if the barbarians deny the Spaniards what is theirs by the
law of nations, they commit an offence against them. Hence, if
war is necessary to obtain their rights (ius suum), they may
lawfully go to war” (236).
Vitoria Cont.
Page 237.
Other reason why Spanish may have title to the land: spreading
Christianity. “Christians have a right to preach and announce
the Gospel in the lands of the barbarians” (238).
To protect the innocent from unjust death: cannibalism.
Incapacity to govern themselves: common justification for
imperialism.
Introduction: Antiquity
Development of INR – Lecture Week 1
Antiquity
Why do we need to return to antiquity?
Do events and philosophies speak to our own ideas and political
practices?
What is the historical legacy of ideas from antiquity that have
come to us?
Do we find theories of politics or of “IR” in antiquity?
Is it possible to really understand ancient texts as their authors
intended?
Brown, “Marx and Engels”
Brown, “Marx and Engels”
Thucydides
Lived before Plato & Aristotle.

9. General during the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC). Result is
Sparta victory.
History of the Peloponnesian War (written 7 years before the
end of the war)
The polis is Thucydides’ main political unit; no intimation of
larger Pan-Hellenic union.
“In fine, I have written my work, not as an essay which is to
win the applause of the moment, but as a possession of all
time.”
Thucydides Cont.
More than just a narrative history: there are theoretical
positions that can be teased out. Was Thucydides offering a
“scientific” account of the causes of war between Sparta and
Athens? (i.e. an objective analysis of events).
Or was there a normative claim? Practical moral objectives; a
tragic sensibility?
Thucydides Cont.
What was the cause of the war between Sparta and Athens? Sea
power vs. Land Power; cultural center vs. provincial estate;
trade vs. self-sufficiency.
Increasing division of Greece into two alliance systems: Delian
League and Peloponnesian League.
Thucydides: “The Growth of the power of Athens, and the alarm
which this inspired in Sparta, made war inevitable.”
Thucydides Cont.
Prelude to War: naval rivalry between Corcyra and Corinth.
Corcyra allies itself with Athens and Corinth with Sparta.
Deep-root of war: Fear => Security Dilemma.
Uncertainty of future intentions.
Perception of a lack of alternative to war. Better to fight now

10. than wait until losing becomes inevitable.
Similar calculation in Germany 1914 and fear of Franco-British
encirclement.
Thucydides Cont.
Two types of Fear:
1) Mutual fear between two great powers => entails mutual
respect. Potential for destabilization when there’s an imbalance
of fear (i.e. when one power becomes increasingly powerful).
2) Fear of tyranny of one power over another (i.e. Mytilene
revolt against Athens).
Thucydides Cont.
Fear is central for Thucydides.
The emergence of Empire is a consequence of fear; think of the
significance of fear today to compel American national security
and foreign policy. Why are we so fearful?
Thucydides Cont.
Key moments: (importance in his text of speeches, generally
rewritten by him).
Pericles Funeral Oration: Eulogy of Athens.
Mytilene Debate: Athenian Response to the revolt of Mytilene.
Corcyrean Revolution: Slaughter of anyone opposed to
democratic faction.
Melian Dialogues: You’re either with us or against us.
Thucydides the Tragedian
What is a Tragedy?
Dionysus (God of win/win-making) gives Icarius wine and tells
him to introduce it to shepherds throughout Attica. The
Shepherds get drunk and suspect that Icarius is up to no good

11. and murder him. While dying he remembered that when he
previously planted the grapes he caught a goat poaching them
and in a fit a rage he had it killed. He then skinned it and
improvised a dance to honor the goat.
Hence tragedy = “goat song”. Tragos = he-goat; aeidein = “to
sing”.
Cont.
Tragedy becomes a significant genre of theatrical/choral
performance in Ancient Greece. Aeschylus, Sophocles,
Euripedes.
Example: Antigone
Tension between natural and state law; Antigone caught
between the two and only reconciliation is suicide.
Creon is punished by the Gods.
Cont.
Tragic Trajectory: Hubris (Excessive self-pride) - > Hamartia
(error, tragic flaw) - > nemesis (wrath of the Gods).
What does tragedy impart to the spectator?
Aristotle: catharsis, pity and fear leads to cleansing or
purification (medical sense); understand one’s limits => an
ethical notion.
Aristotle on Politics
Artistole: man is a political animal, zoon politikon, we have a
natural impulse to live with others; friendship is a natural
instinct in the human race; seems to extend beyond Greece.
Nonetheless, natural difference between Greeks and non-
Greeks. Greeks act in conformity with reason; barbarians lesser
functions and therefore prone to being ruled – destitute of
reason (Assumed).

12. Aristotle Cont.
The main problem Aristotle identifies is the manner in which
barbarians don’t distinguish between women and slaves: “But
among barbarians no distinction is made between women and
slaves, because there is no natural ruler among them: they are a
community of slaves, male and female.”
Which for him this means they don’t live according to reason,
which implies that there is a natural hierarchy between men,
women and slaves. The fact that barbarians don’t live according
to reason implies then that are only fit to be ruled by Greeks.
Can barbarians change? Can they learn Greek and behave like
Greeks? No, intrinsic features of being other, non-Greek. Their
telos is inferior.
Aristotle Cont.
Is the political equivalent to management of the household?
“The conclusion is evident: that governments which have a
regard to the common interest are constituted in accordance
with the strict principles of justice, and are therefor the true
forms; but those which regard only the interest of the rulers are
all defective and perverted forms, for they are despotic, whereas
a state is a community of freemen” (70).
What is the state for? The good life? (72-73). Happiness
(eudemonia) (81).