NEOREALISTS AND POSTSTRUCTURALISTS

Neorealists And Poststructuralists

Neorealist And Poststructuralists

Introduction

As the title suggests I have chosen to focus on one particular brand of realism, neorealism, as offered by Kenneth Waltz. The reason for my focusing on neorealism is that I feel realism, perhaps the dominant theory of international politics, represents a body of thought as rich and diverse as its criticisms. It is my opinion however, that neorealism has occupied a place within the foreign policy programmes of the world's governments, and exercised its influence over their decisions. The main purpose of the essay to compare the threats perceived within the modern world such as terrorism, authoritarianism, rogue states and-so-forth all come from the anarchy problematic, the construction of a hostile 'Other'… in this case traditionally the global South. Though neorealism may have suffered a hiatus in the post-Cold War era, I think, particularly post 9/11 that it has experienced somewhat of a comeback. Post-structuralism primarily encompasses the intellectual developments of certain 20th-century French and continental philosophers and theorists. The movement is difficult to define or summarize, but may be broadly understood as a body of distinct responses to structuralism, which argued that human culture may be understood by means of a structure—modelled on language—that is distinct both from the organisations of reality and those of ideas or the imagination—the "third order."

The key themes of neorealism, demonstrating that for Waltz, the state is the main actor and that it is constrained in its actions by systemic pressures, which act upon it. Such pressures are most notably: anarchy, and the behaviour of other states. Consequently, Waltz has asserted that the realm of international relations is a game of power politics in which states constantly jostle to achieve balances-of-power. Following this, I will concern myself with the anarchy problematic. Here I will argue that in assuming the presence of anarchy, and in our discoursing of it we in-turn create it, theory is practice, and this has been an essential requirement in establishing the sovereign identity of states as they are required to be contrasted against that what they are not, namely a hostile 'Other'. I will focus on the construct that is the state within the essay, examining through a poststructural lens, such themes as boundaries and identity, and the violence these exclusionary themes produce. I will also question how the state has secured itself as a primary mode of subjectivity in neorealist thought, where it is accorded a 'naturalness' that is to last into perpetuity. Neorealists see no other actor replacing the state, in-fact they are critical of anything contrary to, or attempting to go beyond, the existing order of things. To do this I will invoke an approach similar to that of Foucault's 'limit attitude'. Finally, I will present my conclusion in which I will proffer my opinion, arguing that whilst my own theoretical leanings are of a poststructuralist stance, I would not advocate an abolishment of theorising with the state construct in mind. Rather I think what is needed is an ...