How can theory help us to study, understand, and explain the twenty-first-century world?
Twenty Five years back, three broad perspectives were dominated on International Relations with theoretical reflection. 1950s and 1960s behavioral revolution in the United States was intensely influenced by numerous assumptions based on natural sciences. This theory has helped in making the field. The behaviorist camp has existed with a number of varieties. The 1960s were the influential years for the quantitative approach, whereas others were found rational and public choice come from game theoretic approaches as pioneered by the RAND Corporation. In the late 1970s Kenneth Waltz was the most influential theoretical voice of the time as he has developed a theory of international politics using contemporary philosophy of science. This is the austere concept of mony and parsi system. United States was not the only country who has adopted these positivist methods, but also Asia, Europe and the UK. The international theory has a classical approach that leads to emerge in the “English School” but numerous of its text was written and mainly it was a forced to be estimated.
The theory of international relations has shaped and informed the thinking of the academic ideas that public intellectuals have translated and disseminated. Certainly, the entrance of the idealism, liberalism and idealism into the public debate and policymaking arena that has made the worldviews simplistic for the intellectual window dressing. Further, it is explained that realism in the liberal democracies is the theory that everyone hates to talk. The naïve beliefs of international institutions and law alone are now an antidote because they can preserve peace. Moreover, the Liberalism is considered as a powerful image that is massively self-evident when it comes to the human rights advocates, U.S. political spectrum and neoconservatives.
Academic theorists are mostly dismissed by those who made foreign policy, but the connection between the policy of the real world and the theory of the abstract world is an inescapable. The requirement of theories is the one that makes sense out of the storm of information that portrays on a daily basis. The ideas behind the policy makers are on their own based on the question that refers to the ways the world works to decide what to be done and these policy makers are considered as contemptuous about “Theory”. It is way too hard to catch the complexity of world politics that is contemporary with no single approach. That is why, Walt has pointed out about a diverse array which is a better way to compete with ideas instead of an orthodox single theoretical approach. The strengths and weaknesses of theories are revealed when competition occurs as it provides refinements, also showing the errors present in the traditional wisdom. It is better to welcome contemporary scholarship of the heterogeneity and more focus should be on inventiveness above the invective.
The post - structuralis’s challenge is there for the contemporary critical theorists who are working in these traditions. The philosophy of history is the most rigid one as it enhances the chances for the hazard of settling in the undemocratic and sealed forms of instrumentalism. Another point of view is the acceptance of contingency, multiplicity and uncertainty of political programs that can become decrease the chances of concrete political actions to emerge for guidance.
Meanwhile, such debates refer to the diversity of traditional scholarship that is based on international relations, with the noticeable convergence signs. It is considered by many realists who identify the militarism, nationalism, other domestic factors and ethnicity as very essential for those liberals who believe that international behavior is the central power. Whereas other constructivist describes those powerful states who are backed by ideas can have a greater impact. As such ideas are reinforced by those forces that have enduring material strength. Considering the numerous academic point of view that has stated realism the most usual and compelling framework for the next century to understand the international affairs. The main consideration is Balance of power related to the key conflict with probabilities that can take place. Essential aspects of world politics captured by numerous competing perspectives.
The optimistic view is presented in the diversity of theories to understand the 21st century world perspective based on theory approach that portray the political standing as the occupied range of political positions. Whereas post-structuralists based on any academia contribution will create a modification that is mainly focused on adopting the critique attitude. Irrespective of the results of specific exploration, the vital new resources have provided by the theory is to understand international relations. Numerous hurdles of traditional significance arise that are specifically related to the constant salience of political identity, violence of the non-state and global economic procedures are the issues that can’t be explained according to the theoretical resources presented in the 1970s discipline. Highly complex social procedure is sustained according to the scholar’s nuanced understanding towards historical world development based on the critical analysis. To continue working the International Relations are considered as a discipline that is not only satisfying but also intellectually stimulating.
Bibliography
Walt, Stephen M. "International relations: one world, many theories." Foreign Policy (1998): 29—46.
Rengger, Nicholas and Ben Thirkell-White. "Still critical after all these years? The past, present and future of Critical Theory in International Relations." Review of International Studies 33, no. S1 (2007): 3--24.
Snyder, Jack. "One World, Rival Theories." International Relation (2004): 53-62.
