STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS Question 1 Question 1 part 1 Presentism concerned with contemporary history expertise needed on current events Calls for forward thinking rather than backward thinking Insisting or assuming that what prevails today also prevailed in every other time and place Ahistorisim the search for general laws that apply to the past as well as the present Theorists seek to identify laws that are immune to historical variation Studying the past but only to discover general laws to apply to all times and places Eurocentrism Brought 1st international system together through colonialism and those not with Euro stamp were forced to conform for example Japan May be true but the history can be told by ignoring and distorting info Eurocentric accounts invariably ignore Afro Eurasian system that evolved long before the Euros began to extend across the globe Very closely related to Edward Said s Orientalism IR is too commonly studied from this very Eurocentric perspective w a co commitment failure to come to terms w how non euros others understand IR and organize their world assuming that what happened in Europe and the broader West is a microcosm of what happened everywhere Anarchophilia IR for the past 5000 years has not been anarchic but arranged on a spectrum anarchy at one end and empire at the other with hegemony suzerainty and dominion in between Assuming that anarchy is natural and at its root eternal in International Relations State centrism almost inseparable from anarchophilia Big reason for underdeveloped conceptualization of the international system Assuming that states are always and forever the dominant actors in International Relations Presentism A tendency to look into the past through a contemporary modern present lens Analysts will occasionally look into the past and study history but only for the purpose of uncovering parallels to the modern European experience They don t take in the full scope of the international system in history overall 19 Focus tends to be placed on events that were only important in Western society s history Ahistoricism implies that social scientists need to search for laws that apply across time Eurocentrism a strong force in IR IR theory was initially introduced by European states so it is the generally accepted theory States were infused bwith such European concepts as territorial boundaries and colonial administration Eurocentrism ignores AfroEurasian history that had occurred previously Anarchophilia Classical realists express mixed feelings about anarchy liberals see it as a cause for war and disorder Strongest in neorealism Anarchophilia is a tendency to lean towards anarchy State Centrism Similar to Anarchophilia It brings about the underdeveloped conceptualization of the international system 2a The Realism Idealism debate occurred in the 20 s and 30 s It asked the questions does capitalism lead to war what are the most effective ways of dealing with totalitarian state aggression and in the US is retreat from entangling alliances a reasonable response to a world turned upside down by war and economic depression b Neo Realists two main objectives 1 Make Classical Realism more scientific and rigorous by getting away from all that history and philosophy and law 2 Put down a challenge from theorists of transnational relations and interdependence theorists Neorealist theory was first outline by Kenneth Waltz in his book Theory of International Politics 1979 Modern times depend on logic rationality and science Philosophical approaches have lost some legitimacy since classical times It was going to turn classical realist theory into a rigorous and positivist social science c Neoliberalism arises in the 70s It is a continuance and redefinition of classical liberalism influenced by the neoclassical theories of economics Due to interconnectivity of the world society trade has flourished on a global scale thus highlighting the importance of a trade economy Neoliberalism seeks free trade and governmental economic control which leads to rapid industrialization d 1979 1989 The two groups disagreed over statism Neorealist and state fragmentation Neoliberalist might is right issues see following compare contrast Realism 1 Statism nation state 2 Self help lack of cooperation Can t expect help from other states 3 Survival 4 Raison d etat Machiavelli The state doesn t have to be involved in religious or moral issues 5 War is a permanent reality 6 National Interest help state survive power 7 Thucydides Weak vs Strong Liberalism 1 State fragmentation NGOs Individuals etc 2 Cooperation mutual interest PART 1 1 Presentism International Relations as a social science has stubbornly focused on modern history and current policy issues The ever changing nature of IR coupled with the demand for expertise on current global issues encourage a more forward looking train of thought Buzan and Little say the only time IR experts delve into history these forays are only to search for parallels to the modern European experience and not in the sprit of realizing the overall history of international systems Essentially the present is used to understand the past 2 Ahistorism Ahistorism does not infer that the past is irrelevant for historians rather it means that that these historians should look for general trends laws than explain events both in the present and in the past 3 State Centrism State centrism is the underdevelopment of the idea of the international system Too much attention is paid to the political and military aspects via the state in the international system Essentially IR scholars have looked at IR through a states perspective not an international system perspective 4 Anarchophilia Anarchophilia is the result of Eurocentrism and ahistoricism Anarchism is the realist assumption that the history if international systems is anarchic devoid of any orderly governance Scholar Adam Watson in Buzan and Little says the last 5 000 years of international history have not been anarchic at all In fact it could be said that anarchism is an extreme with an empires being the other extreme 5 Eurocentrism Eurocentrism has plagued all aspects of social sciences including IR Eurocentrists completely ignore the Afro Eurasian system before the Europeans assumed a global influence Buzan and Little argue that IR theory should be based not in the origins of Europe but a more holistic approach IR has been studied from European perspective PART II MOST VULNERABLE Buzan and