10 January 2018
Theory to international relations is a modern discussion meaning that it has fewer studies or researches done over it. The amount of change in the methods of international relations, however, makes it a complex and ever evolving subject that will never have an absolute answer. Thus, emphasizing the theoretical aspect wondering why things are the way they are and what to think of it looking forward into the future. The majority of the reason people from other nations take part in one another’s daily lives is due to the supply and demand culture in the economy. Certain places have a product or supply that others want, and they want to get something in return. It’s what powers the global economy. To answer these questions towards international relations, academics try to justify reasons and actions with certain areas or beliefs. Classical Realism and Neoliberalism are two large topics of conversation among scholars. These two views on the international system zoom in on the issues of human nature and flaws in the system. Looking at where the world is now, seeing which one is superior is based off the most comprehensible answer. Neoliberalism (or Structural Realism) is superior to Classical Realism, especially when viewing the economic effect of international relations.
In order to truly understand the inferiority of Classical Realism, one must have an understanding of both of the theories. Classical Realism sees the end goal for international relations is to be without order. They see the order to lie within correcting the flaws within human nature. Humans are seen to be the reason for problems and obstacles within the realm of international relations. Humans are the ones who create and interpret the laws. Therefore, if there is a flaw within the international system, it is rooted in the flaws of man. They are the reason states lust for power and control over the rest of the states.