So-called “Realism” - Part I

 A “constructivist” lens isn't the only way to view the world of war. A competing lens is called “realism.” It's a misnomer; “realism” is not more “real” or “realistic” than constructivism.

To a “realist,” all that matters is power. “Realism” the theory that all countries are in a perpetual war/struggle to exert power over all other countries.

The term “power” is defined by the ability to tell another country what to do. If a powerful country tells a less powerful country what to do with its resources, how to develop, how to treat its people etc., the weaker country will be compelled to obey the more powerful country or face military consequences.

The way for a country to “win” in a realist world is to be the most powerful country for as long as possible. Push everyone else around to avoid being pushed around by others.

Unlike constructivists, realists claim it has always been this way, and always will be this way. A perpetual struggle with the constant threat of warfare everywhere.

“Realism” seems brutally horrific to Mennonites. Our religious identity is based on hope, not pessimism, and on finding a third way, not returning to violence perpetually.

It helps to remember that “realism” is just a theory. We don't have to accept it ourselves. But knowing what “realism” is helps us because we can better understand how some national leaders make decisions about the wars in our world from a “realist” perspective.

Josef Stalin was likely a “realist.”

Dick Cheney was likely a “realist.”

Vladimir Putin is likely a “realist.”

By understanding “realism,” we can better understand what leaders such as these are choosing to do.