Contending Perspectives on International Politics

Define the following terms:

Anarchy, Bourgeoisie, Collective(group) egoism, Commercial liberalism, Constructivism, Core, Democratic Liberalism, Feminism, Gender, George Kennan, Hans Morgenthau, Harmony of interests, Idealism, Karl Marx, Levels of analysis, Liberal institutionalism, Liberal internationalism, Liberalism, Marxist, Nonneutrality of the state, Periphery, Proletariat, Realism, Security dilemma, Thucydides.


Answer these questions by writing five sentences for each:

1. Different theories embody varying levels of pessimism and optimism about the future of international relations. Which of the theories discussed in this chapter leave you feeling more or less optimistic, and why?

2. To some extent do the perspectives on international relations differ in the questions they ask rather than the answers they provide; why?

3. It is important to recognize that theories of international relations often share elements in common despite their differences. ( Select various combinations(e. g.realists and Marxists, or feminists and constructivists) and identify points of agreements , as well as disagreements. 

4. Would a world in which women occupied more positions of political power be very different in terms how states relate toward each other? Why feminists think it would? Why realists think it would not?   

5. Do you think it is possible to combine different perspectives in a way that make sense? For example someone to be both realist and Marxist, or a feminist and liberal? Do some combination make sense, but not others?

Students are requested to study President Woodrow Wilson Fourteen Points on Idealism (Links to an external site.) and write a one page analysis.