A Comparative Study of Two Theories in International Relations

This essay provides a comparative analysis of two prominent theories in International Relations: the English School (International Society) and Classical Liberalism. The English School emphasizes the institutionalization of shared interests and identities among states, focusing on the creation and management of shared values, rules, and institutions. It highlights the evolution of international society from a privileged association of European states to a global society governed by common rules and interests. Classical Liberalism, on the other hand, centers on individual rights, free markets, and limited government intervention, advocating for international peace through free trade and individual liberty. The essay explores the core tenets of each theory, including the English School's focus on international law, diplomacy, and the balance of power, and Classical Liberalism's emphasis on natural rights, utilitarianism, and individual self-reliance, ultimately highlighting the fundamental differences in their approaches to understanding global politics.

International Relations 1
International relations
Introduction:
International relations is the complex approach which is considered as the family of theories and
number of theories are offered by the international relations, and these theories presents the
challenge before the new comers to IR theory. This paper defines the theories related to the

International relations 2
international society (the English school) and the classical liberalism, and this paper also defines
the major difference between the two.
The English School theory provides the base for studying the international and world history in
lieu of the social structures of the international orders, and this study provides the holistic
approach to the concept of the international relations and makes attempt to see the world as
whole. This theory is framed on the basis of the difference between three important concepts that
are international system, international society and world society. This theory results in the new
approach in the IR theory and also facilitates the middle ground between the opposing theories of
realism and liberalism (Stivachtis, 2018). this Essay defines the theory related to the international
society under The English School.
On the other hand, Classical liberalism is the term which is used for defining the ideology deals
with the private property, an unrestricted market economy, rule of law, constitutional guarantees
related to the freedom of religion and press, and international peace in terms of free trade.
Classical liberalism is considered as the political theory which is based on the belief in
individual, negative freedom, non-religious natural law, spontaneous order, a limited state, and
the rule of law. This article defines the theory related to classical liberalism and then applied that
theory to the international relations, and because of this it is necessary to sketch the outlines of
the classical liberal approach to the politics of the world.
International Society:
International society is defined as the institutionalization of the shared interest and identity in the
states, and rationalism position the creation and management of the shared values, rules, and
institutions by considering the IR theory. Position of International society theory is parallel to
regime theory, but this theory is much deeper in concept and has constitutive approach instead of
only instrumental implications. International society approach is derived from the English School
thinking, and the concept related to this society is quite well developed and relatively clear (Bull,
1966).
During the period of 17th and 18th centuries, international society is considered as the privileged
association of European and ‘civilized’ states, which hold visible expression in the certain
institutions which involves international law, diplomacy, and the balance of power. There was
the sense of European powers which were guaranteed by the code of conduct in their dealings
with each other and this code of conduct is not implemented in their dealings with other
societies. In 19th century, lawyers of international law spread the cultural duality between the
Europeans and Non-Europeans and also between the civilized and non-civilized peoples. The
difference between the civilized and barbarous’ humanity means that states which belongs to the
any category in context of the different stages of legal recognition. Later, when European
international society extends its power all over the globe, there are number of non-European
states who want to join the international society. Therefore, European states required to frame

International relations 3
those rules and regulations under which non-European political institutions can be admitted. The
result of all these efforts was seen in the establishment of the civilization standard, and these
standards reflect the norms related to the liberal European civilization (Murray, 2018).
It must be noted that civilization standards includes those standards which reflects the
compliance of basic human rights, and also ensure the maintenance of the domestic legal system
which provide justice and equality. Therefore, it can be said that those countries which are not
willing or unable to guarantee such rights cannot be considered as he civilized nations.
A new international society is established at the end of First World War (1914–1918), and
establishment of this society is followed by the League of Nations in 1920. This League of
Nations is established for the new global international society which is framed for accepting all
the laws and regulations that have been introduced by the European international society, which
also includes its international law and diplomacy (Bull, 1977). I must be noted that, basic
assumptions related to the sovereignty and the judicial equality of the states is recognized by the
members of the society. The appearance of the bipolar world of the Cold War (1947–1991), I
which world is divided by the two superpowers into their preferred paths, and this result in the
separation of the new global international society between the two international societies in
which one deals with the United States and one with the Soviet Union. Conclusion of this war
during the period of 1991 consider two concepts; first related with the separation of the global
international society which already ended, and second related with the regional international
societies (Alderson & Hurrell, n.d.).
As argued by the Hedley Bull, states shared the particular common interest that is unusual fear of
the unrestricted violence, and this result in the development of the particular set of rules. On the
basis of this argument it can be said that international society is exited at the time when either
group of states or group of the independent political communities which usually not form any
system in the context that behavior of each group is the most important factors for determining
the behavior of other states, but it also established the dialogue and common rules for
determining their behavior and also recognize their common interest for this purpose. Bull
further stated any type of society required rules for restraining different practices such as use of
force, holiness of agreements, property laws. If these elements are not present then there is no
society (Bull, 1966).
It must be noted that these rules are stated in the set of institutions that mainly determine the
normative structure of any society at international level. In context of the classical English
School these rules are war, the great powers, diplomacy, the balance of power, and international
law, mainly in the mutual understanding of the power of the states. Some other rules might be
included in the existing rules such as territoriality, nationalism, the market, and human equality.
However, these rules are not binding in nature and there are no such institutions which make
order against the violations of these rules, and because of this discussing these rules cause more
suitable. Those states which respect these basic rules will form an international society.

International relations 4
Therefore, international society is defined as the relationship which regulated by norms and this
relationship is accepted by the members who have at least limited responsibilities towards each
other and towards completed society. States can follow their interest, but not at all the costs.
Another manner in which this concept can be considered is the idea which play important role in
making this system work (Bull, 2000).
There are different accounts within the school, and these accounts consider the evolution of those
ideas. Some off the scholars make argument that origins of this concept are available in the
remnants of medieval conceptions of societas Christiana, and other scholars such as Bull stated
that the main aim of this society deals in the concerns of the sovereign states for the purpose of
protecting the basic objectives such as their survivals. Maximum research of The English School
in context of the contemporary societies of states is considered as the partly the creation of the
common civilization - the Christian world of medieval Europe and partly the creation of the
Lockean contract.
After considering this theory, it can be said that this theory is based on the sovereignty states and
civilized society, and this theory introduced some rules which must be complied by the states if
they want to become the part of the society (Clark, 2007).
Classical Liberalism:
Liberalism is considered as the political doctrine or ideology which falls under the process of
change or evolution. As per this theory all the elements are changing and liberalism such as
society, its material or environmental atmosphere, people’s attitude, etc. for the purpose of
ensuring their own survival. In other words, these elements make efforts to put up itself in
context of these changes, and the process of change is continuous in nature. It must be noted that,
liberalism originated from the collapse of feudalism. The space originated from the failure of
feudalism was immediately filled by the concept of capitalism and in the era of capitalist
economy, liberalism created. Therefore, this liberalism is known as the classical liberalism. It
can be said that, this is not the different type of liberalism and there is no big difference in the
basic nature and elements of the liberalism. This type of liberalism forcefully pressurizes the
maximum form of the individual interest or individualism. In this theory, each and every
individual is considered as the separate unit which wants to increase their interest arduously. As
per the political experts, this approach is determined as the type of egoistical individualism
(Seigal, 2011).
Classical liberalism concept is the atomist clarification of the society, and it is based on the
particular presumptions. As per the atomist individualism, there is believe that individuals are
both balanced and sensible, and both the qualities of their personality allowed them to make such
decision which are enough to protect their interest perfectly. It is also known as the self-reliance
of the individuals, and individual is not depending on the state for the purpose of the realization

International relations 5
of their interest. This theory further states that individuals are the unit which only consider self-
interest, but still there is no doubt that they are rational and reasonable and intentionally they
does not cause any injury or harm to another person’s. Those who defend this theory only
consider the interest of the individual and not the whole society (Nitisha, n.d.).
This approach is based on number of theories and one of these theories is the natural rights. This
liberalism approach believes that natural rights of the individual are unchallengeable and this
absoluteness of the natural rights pressurizes the authority to protect these rights. The major
scholars of the natural rights theory are John Locke and Thomas Jefferson of United States. John
stated that individuals in the state of nature possessed number of rights such as right of life, right
of liberty, and right of property, and the main obligation in context of these rights is imposed on
the civil governments of the state that is to protect these rights (Nitisha, n.d.).
Particular inconvenience of the state of nature restricts the realization of some of these natural
rights, and those individuals who promote the civil society did not want any repetition of the
non-realization of these rights. Support of Locke is also with the English Revolution and the Bill
of Rights (IEA, n.d.). In case any natural right of the individual violates then it cause great
insignificant to the citizens. One more scholar also supports this theory that was Jefferson (1743-
1826). Once Jefferson stated, that government which regulates less is considered as the best
government. The minimum regulates the government the maximum realization of the natural
rights is ensured.
A stated above the most important approach of this theory is the inalienability, and this means
that state is never obligated control these natural rights, instead of that they are obligated to
encourage them (the conversation, 2014).
Utilitarianism approach and utilitarian philosophy give one more foundation related to the
classical liberalism, and before understanding the relations between the two it is necessary to
understand it. The best definition in context of Utilitarianism approach is “any actions which
resulted in the greatest happiness are considered as the good action. This definition is the general
definition, and in this it is generally observed by the Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and James
Mill (1773-1836), that this theory is the moral philosophy. Relevance of the utilitarianism in
context of the liberalism can be considered from different angles.
Firstly, justifiability and non-justifiability of any action can be determined by the capacity of the
action to encourage the happiness. In case action fails to do it, then this theory cannot be
imposed on the person and if it is imposed then it is considered as the immoral action. Second
approach in this context is the individualism, which means a person is the best judge of what is
good and bad for his own because he is sensible and rational, and do anything which is against
the will or opinion of that person is considered as unjustified.
Third approach in this context stated that government cannot ignore the opinions of the person
while adopting any person. All these basic approach of the utilitarianism theory clearly reflects
the elements of the classical liberalism. Therefore, it is clear that both the theories mainly

International relations 6
preferred the opinion and judgment of the individual. The utilitarianism theory mainly drives the
growth of the classical liberalism.
On the basis of above facts, it is clear that classical liberalism is the theory which mainly focus
on the rights of the individual, and this theory also believes that individuals are the best judge
and they can consider their good in more better way.
Major Difference:
Difference between the international society theory and classical liberalism is clear, and this
section highlights the key points which distinguish these two theories:
International society theory is the part of the English School theory which includes complete
state in its ambit, but classical liberalism is the more individual approach and this theory focus
on the rights of the individual. Theory of international society mainly stated that certain common
interest is shared by all the states in context of their fear such as violence, and because of this
fear certain rules are stated by the states (Burchill & linklater, 2005). Therefore, it can be stated
that this theory mainly derives the dialogue and common rules for the society and also consider
the common interest of the society in this context. This theory considers the interest of the
society and state as whole, and does not consider the interest on the individual on separate basis.
On the other hand, classical liberalism is the approach which mainly focuses on the
individualism and this theory determine the interest of the individual by considering the
individual as separate unit. In other words, Classical liberalism is the approach which pressurizes
the interest of the individual and not the whole society. As per this theory, each and every
individual is rational and reasonable and such individual has potential to consider their best
interest. Classical liberalism is the approach which is related to the utilitarianism approach
because both the theories have similar approach (Mcglinchey & walters, 2017)
However, some similarities are also there in both the theories such as both the theories mainly
focus on the rights of the people such as international society focus on the rules for society, while
classical liberalism is the approach which also focus on the rights.
Conclusion:
After considering the above facts, it can be said that both the theories are completely different
from each other, as international society theory is the part of the English School theory and it
mainly focus on the rules which makes the society more civilized and it further stated that in case
any state fails to consider the rules of this society then it cannot become the part of the society.
International society is defined as the institutionalization of the shared interest and identity in the
states, and rationalism position the creation and management of the shared values, rules, and
institutions by considering the IR theory. On the other hand, classical liberalism is the political
approach which mainly focuses on the rights of the individuals and state that individual is able to

International relations 7
understand their interest and there is no need to pressurize the government. Classical liberalism
concept is the atomist clarification of the society, and it is based on the particular presumptions.
As per the atomist individualism, there is believe that individuals are both balanced and sensible,
and both the qualities of their personality allowed them to make such decision which are enough
to protect their interest perfectly.
References:
Alderson, K. and Hurrell, A. Hedley Bull on International Society. London: Macmillan.
Bull, H. (1966) ‘Society and Anarchy in International Relations’. In Butterfield and Wight
(1966), 35-50.
Bull, H. (1966) ‘The Grotian Conception of International Society’. In Butterfield and Wight
(1966), 51-73.
Bull, H. (1977) The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London:
Macmillan.
Bull, H. (2000) ‘International Relations as an Academic Pursuit’. In Alderson and Hurrell
(2000), 246-64.
Burchin, S. & Linklater, A. (2005). theories of international relations. Available at:
http://lib.jnu.ac.in/sites/default/files/RefrenceFile/Theories-of-IR.pdf. Accessed on 13th June
2018.
Clark, I. (2007) International Legitimacy and World Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
IEA. Classical liberalism. Available at: https://iea.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Butler-
interactive.pdf. Accessed on 13th June 2018.
Mcglinchey, S. & Walters, R. (2017). International relations. Available at: http://www.e-
ir.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/International-Relations-Theory-E-IR.pdf. Accessed on 13th
June 2018.
Murray, R. (2016). An Introduction to the English School of International Relations. Available
at: https://www.e-ir.info/2016/01/05/an-introduction-to-the-english-school-of-international-
relations/. Accessed on 12th June 2018.
Nitisha. Classical Liberalism: Elements, Theories and Revival. Available at:
http://www.politicalsciencenotes.com/liberalism/classical-liberalism-elements-theories-and-
revival/807. Accessed on 13th June 2018.
Seigal, C. (2011). Classical Liberalism. Available at:
http://www.preservenet.com/classicalliberalism/ClassicalLiberalism.pdf. Accessed on 13th June
2018.

International relations 8
Stivachtis, Y. (2018). Introducing the English School in International Relations Theory.
Available at: http://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/23/introducing-the-english-school-in-international-
relations-theory/. Accessed on 12th June 2018.
The Conversation, (2014). What is a ‘classical liberal’ approach to human rights?. Available at:
https://theconversation.com/what-is-a-classical-liberal-approach-to-human-rights-24452.
Accessed on 13th June 2018.