In European-American culture the tension between "what there is" and "what there should be" has been a constant source of political action. In the interest of becoming more "scientific," modern political science increasingly fails to recognize that power is interpersonal, not institutional. Arguing against the current mainstream thought, Andr̀s L̀nczi contributes to the recently renewed interest in political realism by suggesting we return to the basic understanding of politics: power and political action. The modern bias towards democracy has become fundamental, or to put it differently, democracy is a political religion today. This result from the confusion of two different realms of life: the realm of manners, the written and unwritten rules how we should live our lives, and the methods we apply when we wish to understand political matters scientifically. L̀nczi shows how the distinction must be sharply drawn between norms of morals and manners, and those of scholarly inquiries.
In this 1996 book Roger Spegele argues that in the past international theorists have failed to recognise that there is not one conception of international relations, subdivided into different theories and approaches, but at least three wholly different conceptions of the subject. Though scholars are increasingly prepared to accept this, there is still no consensus about what to call these conceptions, how to describe them, and why they should be studied. This book attempts to fill this gap. The author first examines two conceptions of IR - positivism-empiricism and emancipatory international relations - which challenge political realism. He then defends a revised version of realism, called 'evaluative political realism', from challenges arising from its rivals, with the aim of defining a conception of political realism which is coherent, viable, and attractive
"'McQueen meticulously and ingeniously traces the apocalyptic quality of the contexts in which political authors/actors such as Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Morgenthau wrote, and how this apocalypticism inflitrated their writings. The book is certain to make an enormous impact in the fields of political thought, intellectual history, and American studies, especially given the now fashionable 'theological' turn in political theory and the dramatic surge in apocalyptic politics throughout the world.'--John P. McCormick, University of Chicago"--Book jacket
The first reference work to explore the 2000-year history of political realism and reassess its place in today's worldDownload an ebook of the chapter abstracts and notes on contributors (pdf)Political realism is a highly diverse body of international relations theory. This substantial reference work examines political realism in terms of its history, its scientific methodology and its normative role in international affairs.Split into three sections, it covers the 2000-year canon of realism: the different schools of thought, the key thinkers and how it responds to foreign policy challenges faced by individual states and globally. It brings political realism up-to-date by showing where theory has failed to keep up with contemporary problems and suggests how it can be applied and adapted to fit our new, globalised world order.Key FeaturesThe first volume to offer a full, balanced guide to Political Realism: its history and its normative role in international affairsCovers the main thinkers, from Thucydides through Niccolò Machiavelli to Isaiah BerlinEngages with the major foreign policy issues of our times, such as strategic deterrence, nationalism, terrorism, cyber security, climate change, the open society and religionConsiders political realism in non-Western contexts, including Israel, Russia and ChinaIncludes political realism's ground-up growth and interpretation outwith Western contextsContributorsUriel Abulof, Tel-Aviv University, Israel.Christopher Adair-Toteff, Zeppelin University, Germany.Erica Benner, Yale University, USA.John Bew, King's College London, UK.Todd Breyfogle, Aspen Institute, Washington, D.C., USA.Joshua Cherniss, Georgetown University, USA.Alan Chong, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Singapore.Lindsay P. Cohn, U.S. Naval War College, USA.Kody W. Cooper, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, USA.Marzieh Kouhi Esfahani, Durham University, UK.Markus Fischer, California State University, Fullerton, USA.Richard Forno, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, USA.Stuart Gray, Politics at Washington and Lee University, USA.Robert Howse, New York University School of Law, USA.David Martin Jones, University of Queensland, Australia and King's College London, UK.Menno R. Kamminga, University of Groningen, Netherlands.Peter Iver Kaufman, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and University of Richmond, USA.David Kerr, Durham University, UK.Paul Kirkland, Carthage College, Wisconsin, USA.Douglas B. Klusmeyer, American University, Washington, DC, USA.Konstantinos Kostagiannis, University of Maastricht, Netherlands.Ayelet Haimson Lushkov, University of Texas at Austin, USA.Cecelia Lynch, University of California, Irvine, USA.David Mayers, Boston University, USA.Kenneth B. McIntyre, Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas, USA.Neville Morley, University of Exeter, UK.John Mueller, Mershon Center for International Security Studies and Ohio State University, USA.Masashi Okuyama, International Geopolitica
The theory of statecraft explores practical politics through the strategies and manoeuvres of privileged agents, whereas the theory of democracy dwells among abstract and lofty ideals. Can these two ways of thinking somehow be reconciled and combined? Or is statecraft destined to remain the preserve of powerful elites, leaving democracy to ineffectual idealists? J. S. Maloy demonstrates that the Western tradition of statecraft, usually considered the tool of tyrants and oligarchs, has in fact been integral to the development of democratic thought. Five case studies of political debate, ranging from ancient Greece to the late nineteenth-century United States, illustrate how democratic ideas can be relevant to the real world of politics instead of reinforcing the idealistic delusions of conventional wisdom and academic theory alike. The tradition highlighted by these cases still offers resources for reconstructing our idea of popular government in a realistic spirit - skeptical, pragmatic, and relentlessly focused on power