Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.2> Article
Research Article

Which Theory Can Explain World Politics Better? ——Comparison Between Realism and Liberalism

Zhuoran LiGovernor's Academy, Byfield, 01922, United States* Lei TanDepartment of Sociology, Peking University, 100871

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

The realists and liberalists understand the world from different perspectives and tend to explain the whole world in a divergent way. Here comes the eternal question of the academic circle. Who can explain the world better, realists or liberalists? This question is significant because it helps us to comprehend how world politics function and the current political dilemmas better. We argue that realism can explain history better than liberalism. Constant competitions were always presented through the frequent conflicts between countries. It is an irreversible and most unpreventable nature of the world. Through studying the theories, we are able to examine the world more systematically and logically. The classifications of the subject rationale the complicated and distinct historical events. Moreover, following the steps and various ideas of former scholars allows us to develop our own understanding of the world and determine our perspective.

Keywords: world politics; realism; liberalism
Published: February 28, 2023
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2/20220648
Volume: CHR Vol.2
pp. 225-229
Download PDF

References

  1. Kenneth N. Waltz, "Structural Realism after the Cold War." International Security 25, no. 1 (2000): 5-41；John J. Mearsheimer, “Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War,” International Security, Vol. 15, No. 1 (1990), pp. 5-56.
  2. Mearsheimer, John J., and Glenn Alterman. The tragedy of great power politics. WW Norton & Company, 2001.
  3. Charles L. Glaser, “Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-Help,” International Security, Vol. 19, No. 3 (1994-1995), pp. 50-90.
  4. Robert Axelrod and Robert O. Keohane, “Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions,” World Politics, Vol. 38, No.1 (1985), pp.226-25
  5. Dale C. Copeland, “Economic Interdependence and War: A Theory of Trade Expectations,” International Security, Vol. 20, No. 4 (1996), pp. 5-41.
  6. Sebastian Rosato, “The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory,” American Political Science Review 97, no. 4 (2003): 585-602
  7. Waltz, Kenneth N. "Structural realism after the Cold War." International security 25, no. 1 (2000): 5-41.
  8. Waltz, Kenneth N. "Structural realism after the Cold War." International security 25, no. 1 (2000): 5-41.
  9. KEYLOR, WILLIAM R., Norman A. Graebner, and Edward M. Bennett. “Realism, Idealism, and the Treaty of Versailles.” Diplomatic History38, no. 1 (2014): 215–18. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26376542.
  10. Dale C. Copeland, “Economic Interdependence and War: A Theory of Trade Expectations,” International Security, Vol. 20, No. 4 (1996), pp. 5-41.
  11. Dale C. Copeland, “Economic Interdependence and War: A Theory of Trade Expectations,” International Security, Vol. 20, No. 4 (1996), pp. 5-41.
  12. Waltz, Kenneth N. "Structural realism after the Cold War." International security 25, no. 1 (2000): 5-41.