Classical realism (international relations)

Classical realism is an international relations theory from the realist school of thought.^[1] Realism makes the following assumptions: states are the main actors in the international relations system, there is no supranational international authority, states act in their own self-interest, and states want power for self-preservation.^[2] Classical realism differs from other forms of realism in that it places specific emphasis on human nature and domestic politics as the key factor in explaining state behavior and the causes of inter-state conflict.^[3]^[4] Classical realist theory adopts a pessimistic view of human nature and argues that humans are not inherently benevolent but instead they are self-interested and act out of fear or aggression.^[5] Furthermore, it emphasizes that this human nature is reflected by states in international politics due to international anarchy.^{[citation needed]}

Classical realism first arose in its modern form during the interwar period of (1918–1939) as the academic field of international relations began to grow during this era.^[2] Classical realism during the inter-war period developed as a response to the prominence of idealist and utopian theories in international relations during the time.^[6] Liberal scholars at the time attributed conflict to poor social conditions and political systems whilst, prominent policy makers focused on establishing a respected body of international law and institutions to manage the international system. These ideas were critiqued by realists during the 1930s. After World War II, classical realism became more popular in academic and foreign policy settings.^[2] E. H. Carr, George F. Kennan, Hans Morgenthau, Raymond Aron, and Robert Gilpin are central contributors to classical realism.^[7]

During the 1960s and 70s classical realist theories declined in popularity and became less prominent as structural realist (neorealist) theorists argued against using human nature as a basis of analysis and instead proposed that explaining inter-state conflict through the anarchic structure of the international system was more empirical.^[8] In contrast to neorealism, classical realism argues that the structure of the international system (e.g. anarchy) shapes the kinds of behaviors that states can engage in but does not determine state behavior.^[3] In contrast to neorealism, classical realists do not hold that states' main goal is survival.^[3] State behavior is ultimately uncertain and contingent.^[3]

^ Kirshner, Jonathan (2022). An Unwritten Future: Realism and Uncertainty in World Politics. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-16677-3.^{[page needed]}
^ ^a ^b ^c Reus-Smit, Christian; Snidal, Duncan, eds. (2008). The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199219322.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-921932-2.^{[page needed]}
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Cite error: The named reference :7 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Donnelly, Jack (2000). Realism and International Relations. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511612510. ISBN 978-0-521-59229-1.^{[page needed]}
^ Williams, Michael (2007). Realism Reconsidered: The Legacy of Hans Morgenthau in International Relations. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-153716-5.^{[page needed]}
^ Cite error: The named reference :4 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Kirshner, Jonathan (2022). "What Is Classical Realism? Thucydides and His Descendants". An Unwritten Future: Realism and Uncertainty in World Politics. Princeton University Press. pp. 13–42. doi:10.1515/9780691233123-004. ISBN 978-0-691-16677-3. JSTOR j.ctv2hvfj4k.6. Project MUSE chapter 3230109.
^ Schuett, Robert (April 2010). "Classical realism, Freud and human nature in international relations". History of the Human Sciences. 23 (2): 21–46. doi:10.1177/0952695110361421. S2CID 145112792.

[1] Kirshner, Jonathan (2022). An Unwritten Future: Realism and Uncertainty in World Politics. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-16677-3.^{[page needed]}

[:0-2] Reus-Smit, Christian; Snidal, Duncan, eds. (2008). The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199219322.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-921932-2.^{[page needed]}

[:7-3] Cite error: The named reference :7 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[:1-4] Donnelly, Jack (2000). Realism and International Relations. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511612510. ISBN 978-0-521-59229-1.^{[page needed]}

[:2-5] Williams, Michael (2007). Realism Reconsidered: The Legacy of Hans Morgenthau in International Relations. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-153716-5.^{[page needed]}

[:4-6] Cite error: The named reference :4 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[:8-7] Kirshner, Jonathan (2022). "What Is Classical Realism? Thucydides and His Descendants". An Unwritten Future: Realism and Uncertainty in World Politics. Princeton University Press. pp. 13–42. doi:10.1515/9780691233123-004. ISBN 978-0-691-16677-3. JSTOR j.ctv2hvfj4k.6. Project MUSE chapter 3230109.

[8] Schuett, Robert (April 2010). "Classical realism, Freud and human nature in international relations". History of the Human Sciences. 23 (2): 21–46. doi:10.1177/0952695110361421. S2CID 145112792.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]