Suchergebnisse

THE SCHOOL OF THOUGHT THAT HAS TRADITIONALLY CAST DOUBT ON THE ABILITY OF THE UNITED STATES--OR ANY COUNTRY--TO MAKE THE WORLD ANEW IS "REALISM." REALISM HAS BEEN ATTACKED FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS, AND DESPITE RECURRENT ONSLAUGHTS FROM LIBERALS, MARXISTS, PACIFISTS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, DECONSTRUCTIONISTS, AND OTHERS, IT PERSISTS AS THE FUNDAMENTAL METHOD OF ANALYZING WORLD POLITICS. THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES: THE CAUSES OF WAR; THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM; THE CHALLENGE FROM POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC LIBERALISM; SOURCES OF OPTIMISM; THE PROBLEM OF PEACEFUL CHANGE; AND, MORALITY AND FOREIGN POLICY. AFTER THIS EXAMINATION IT CONCLUDES THAT THE UNITED STATES SHOULD RETURN TO SECURING AMERICAN POWER AND INTERESTS, AND TO STRENGTHENING THE CONDITIONS FOR ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE WORLD. IN THAT ORDER.

It has been claimed that the ontological theories of Roy Bhaskar can provide guiding principles for social scientists, which can help steer them through errors and misconceptions. This article argues that neither Bhaskar's 'critical realism' nor any overarching philosophical ontology, can provide workable guiding principles for social scientific research, and that such principles are unnecessary.

Argues that the concept of national security is used to justify the notion of a unipolar world led by the US and dedicated to the promulgation of American values, to the detriment of the social needs of Americans.