Overview of Theoretical Points of View in Political Science

This article discusses the theoretical points of view in political science including realism, liberal institutionalism, and constructivism. It also explores the different state behaviors and outcomes in an anarchical international system and provides the most convincing theoretical standpoint. The subject is Political Science and the reference list is included.

Running head: POLITICAL SCIENCE
POLITICAL SCIENCE
Student’s Name
University Name
Author’s Name

2POLITICAL SCIENCE
Table of Contents
1. Overview of the theoretical points of view............................................................................3
1.1 Realism.............................................................................................................................3
1.2 Liberal Institutionalism....................................................................................................3
1.3 Constructivism..................................................................................................................3
2. Different state behaviour and outcomes in an anarchical international system.....................4
3. Most Convincing Theoretical Standpoints.............................................................................5
Reference List............................................................................................................................6

3POLITICAL SCIENCE
1. Overview of the theoretical points of view
1.1 Realism
Political Realism emphatically implies a combined impact of the theories concerning
international relations, where the interests of the nation state, their role as well as display of
military prowess in the context of world politics becomes evident. The domain of studies of
international relations have been dominating international relations since the Second World
War. Realism emphasises on persisting patterns of interactivity in the context of an
international system that lacks an inherent political control. As opined by Niebuhr, this
anarchic condition implies that there is a difference between policies of domestic politics and
the logic implied in international politics. There is always an acute pessimism among the
realists regarding the proximity of a dramatic systemic reform.
1.2 Liberal Institutionalism
This theory emphasises that importance should be given to international governance
and as well as the international organisations in order to justify international relations.
Institutionalism relies on the roles played by mutual goals in international systems and
capacity of the global organisations to get the nation states to co-operate with one another.
This theory vehemently despises the proposition of the realists that there is always a power
strife among the scopes of international politics. On the contrary, Hay states that this theory
presents the picture of a world in which specific in contrast to the state as an entity, involves
directly in world politics. This theory imagines that force is only an ineffective instrument in
policy making.
1.3 Constructivism
Constructivism is a relatively new theory of international relations that is poised to
justify certain aspects of realism, neoliberalism as well as Marxism. All the aforesaid theories

4POLITICAL SCIENCE
including Constructivism recognises the fact that international system is inherently
anarchical. However constructivists differ the other theorists over the belief that anarchy is
the root cause behind competitions well as war. The theory supports that self-help or even
power politics does not stem out of anarchy. The structure of anarchy have not given birth to
the self-help world where we reside. To quote Alexander Wendt:
“Anarchy is what states make of it”
2. Different state behaviour and outcomes in an anarchical international system
The realists react to anarchic system of the world by professing a self-help assertive
that defends the belief that self-help is the ultimate self-responsibility. The primary motive of
the reactions of the nation state in the context of international anarchy is only survival. This is
a relative conceptualisation that states that increased security for the state implies a decrease
in security for the others. Hence, this theory leads the states to imagine that the other parties
have to be more powerful than them and as such the struggle to achieve more power tends to
continue. As Acharya states, this in turn leads to an increased competition and hence
enhancement of military prowess is balanced. Hence international anarchy is realised through
this theory as a force that fosters militant competitiveness and as an outcome impedes the
willingness among he various nation stares to co-operate on any ground or even share the
mutual interest.
The theory of liberalism supports the standpoint that the international relations are essentially
anarchic. However, the theory additionally implies that with liberal institutionalism, this
anarchy can be easily regulated. That is why the liberalist theory patronises the spread of free
trade among the various nation states. As per Michael, Economic interdependence among the
nation stares most seemingly would be beneficial for the reduction of the likelihood of
engaging in power struggles. Hence, the liberals always induces that in a situation of extreme

5POLITICAL SCIENCE
anarchy, there is always a scope for peace by setting up common grounds, forming state
alliances and other institutions for mutual progress. As per Rana, this policy help to generate
mutual respect for another state and as such alliances are fostered.
The perception of the constructivists are different from that of the realists or the
liberalists. Their view about anarchy in international relations is completely different. They
believe that anarchy is only a fundamental state of the international relations. The strictly
believe that anarchy among the various nation states is a prosthetic creation that is not a
natural state of relations. The traits of social practice is what leads to the emergence of
anarchy among the particular nation states.
3. Most Convincing Theoretical Standpoints
It is difficult to choose the most appropriate viewpoint in this context. However, in
this relation it can be stated that the standpoint of liberalism bridges the gap between the two
extremes of constructivism and realism. Liberalism accepts the current state of relations
among the nation states that is the state of constant anarchy. However, it also professes that
there is a way of remedy to solve the state. Constructivism induces positivity in the aspects of
international relations. However, Shaviro, professes that it is impossible to ignore the
anarchic state of affairs that exist between the various nation states. Hence, it can be justified
that liberalism provides the most justifiable standpoint so far the anarchic international
relations are concerned.

6POLITICAL SCIENCE
Reference List
Acharya, Amitav. Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the
problem of regional order. Routledge, 2014.
Hay, Colin. "Good in a crisis: The ontological institutionalism of social constructivism." New
Political Economy 21.6 (2016): 520-535.
Michael, Buckley. "The Structure of Justification in Political Constructivism." Theories of
Justice. Routledge, 2017. 51-71.
Niebuhr, Reinhold. "Augustine’s political realism." Augustine and Modern Law. Routledge,
2017. 273-298.
Rana, Waheeda. "Theory of complex interdependence: a comparative analysis of realist and
neoliberal thoughts." International Journal of Business and Social Science 6.2 (2015).
Shaviro, Steven. "The universe of things: On speculative realism." (2014).