John Mearsheimer Explains Neorealism
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 чер 2024
- John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago explains neorealism, also referred to as structural realism, in an international relations context.
The video was filmed during the 2019 International Studies Association Annual Convention in Toronto, Canada. Questions were asked by former IAPSS President Tobias Scholz.
The International Association for Political Science Students (IAPSS) is a democratic student government representing political science students around the world. Would you like to get involved with IAPSS? Sign up as an individual member here: www.iapss.org/product-categor... or talk to your campus political science student association or department about affiliating with IAPSS.
Links:
www.iapss.org
/ iapss
/ iapss
/ iapssgram
this man is single handedly saving my IR finals. Thank you
he is also the reason you have the IR final in the first place😔😔
hire me with u plz
he wrote your exam mr/mrs donkey
This man is phenomenon
agreed
smart
Pity his own people did not listen to him
Agreed
The best political scientist ever! His book "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics" where he explains his offensive realism theory is definitely my favourite.
He is the greatest IR/Political Scientist scholar alive.
@@lucasgrey9794 From which book? I don't think so. He is a realist scholar and follows a tradition that goes all the way back to Thucydides.
@@aristidescabeche1506
there is one IMPERATIVE:
IT IS IMPERATIVE that no EurAsian challenger emerges capable of dominating EurAsia and thus of also challenging America
-
Zbignew Brzezinski(Spykman)
What an ignorant sycophant you are. This crass amoral theory is impotent to explain the international framework of states, the role of a right of self-determination in international
law and the behaviour of state actors, or much else actually. This discussion is extremely poor. He chooses his own example, the rise of China, and claims neorealism can predict whether it will be peaceful. Ok, one thinks, so show us how the theory answers that question. But then he says nothing at all, not surprisingly, since the claim that the theory can answer that question is absurd.
@@sheilamacdougal4874 ok I’ll answer your question for you. In the battle between rights and strategy, states will always choose strategic interests. It’s not an impotent explanation by any means.
Realism in IR is incredibly counterintuitive to many. People seem to want to stick to human moral categories when conceptualizing the behavior of nations, anthropomorphizing them, and have a hard time accepting there is no higher authority enforcing a structured order, besides structural power relations.
I would argue it is not. You just need to sit down for a bit, get the basics and fact check it with reality. People do not want to invest any time in that and our so called forth power is doing an awful job in informing the public.
I don’t think it’s a matter of realist precepts being somehow counterintuitive or difficult to understand. Any adult with a normal range of human experiences should realize the fundamentals of IR realism pretty much intuitively - the way we handle personal security can be easily mapped onto security considerations at the state level as well. It’s not hard. But for many in the West, the prospect of violent encroachment into personal space is remote and not part of most people’s daily experience, so they can’t imagine the need to plan for such contingencies in advance. So when state actors engage in preemptive violence, they’re bewildered and outraged. There’s also a lot of childish wishful thinking involved, again primarily in the West. Mearsheimer suggests as much in his book where he warns that “it behooves us to to see the world as it is, not as we would like it to be.”
My favorite is international law and the UN. 😂 Like no they only work when the nation states with hard power go along with it and they also formed those instructions and often ignore them when It's inconvenient.
@@mensrea1251 you are still antropomorphizing nations. You are still using your own moral sense to rationalize their behavior. Nations are made of people, but are not people, they are emergent phenomena, they cannot be reduced to the nature of their components.
Common people, not leaders.
This Man is intellectually brilliant wonderful to listen too easy to understand thank you SIR.
Professor should be given the highest honor that the WORLD can give …. Peace and Prosperity for all
Professor Mearsheimer, you are monumental! The first time I came across your work on neorealism was during my study abroad year at the American University of Beirut ( Lebanon)about nine years ago. Your scholarship and vision are highly respected among the dept of political science and the Lebanese seem to be more in tune with your work than us in Norway, a NATO member country and blind allies of the US. I brought with me back to the U of Oslo, one of your brilliant books’ The Israel Lobby ‘ written by you and your colleague and equally brilliant scholar Professor Stephen Walt. As always, it was an eye opener. The best thing that happened to me was to hear our former and beloved Prime Minister Kåre Willoch praising it and praising both of you for your erudition, courage and brilliance.
"If an intelligent man cannot explain a theory so that a child cannot understand it then he does not understand it himself". I think that's how the saying kind of goes. I'm that child and appreciate this small video gem. Thanks 👍
There is another one - but much better
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
H. L. Mencken
Shouldn't that be, "...so that a child CAN understand it..."?
so thats why we have kindergarteners running around with quantum physics theories, right.
Respect from a Chinese, he says what he thinks is right and that differentiates him from other US scholars in the field of international relations.
I've never focused on foreign policy until I watched a UA-cam video of Mearsheimer's thoughts on China, viewed about 10? years ago. I'm pleased he is still active and involved! I always learn and think as a result of his philosophical ideas.
Neorealism is the simplest theory that offers in-depth explanations and analysis of States behavior in the International system. John Mearsheimer is one of the greatest scholars that the world must respect and remember forever.
👍👍👍👍👍 Thank you so much Dr Mearsheimer, for sharing valuable information. Simple questions that people seldom ask, but which make a lot of difference to fundamental understanding.
Thanks so much IAPSS for inviting Dr Mearsheimer to share his knowledge, and for sharing this video on UA-cam for the benefit of others. Hopefully, some of us will be able to make a bigger difference in the world one day with the knowledge we have gleaned along the way.
Real American Hero with a human heart.
I took an International Theory class in grad school. Heard something similar. Great lecturer.
I studied International Politics in 1990. Prof Mearsheimer rekindles the fond memories of my University life.
Phenomenal explanation
Thank you!
When someone comes up with a theory , which is able to correctly predict outcomes , one can be sure the theory is true . Realism does this . J.M has correctly predicted the Vietnam debacle as well as Iraq , Afghanistan, and several other central and South American errors. Now the present situation in Ukraine JM says leave it alone because it is not a threat and will only drive the Russians and China together , which will be the biggest policy disaster ever .
Neocons love disasters
@潘poon and we all get poorer
Niccollo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes and gametheory was my guides in to this understanding. Now I have a new par of books to read.
Game Theory certainly applies to International Relations. However, there are assumptions in Game Theory that agents (i.e. countries) always act rationally. The US acted emotionally (not entirely rationally) on Ukraine crisis. The US establishment (Nuland, Blinken, etc) holds a grudge against Russia for some reason.
@@IoannisKourouklides usa has demonised Russia for the last 70 years - is not Trump, Binden or whoever is USA mentality to see Russia as the enemy which never was - - the real enemy is on the horizon CHINA
@@IoannisKourouklides Nuland was one of the key instruments in the Ukrainian coup of 2014. Doing everything to undermine Russia's influence in the region is her job. Whether she holds a personal grudge isn't really relevant.
@@trizvanov No, her job is definitely not to "undermine Russia's influence" (which is an emotional grudge). Her job was to promote the national interests of her country (the USA) and strengthen the National Security of her country. Ukraine has no vital national interests for the US and this is a fact. She therefore failed miserably. She is a famous supporter of the warmonger lobby in the US. All these are well-known facts. Anyone can make their own research and find out.
@@IoannisKourouklides NATO expansion is the primary interest of the United States. She'd done her job when organising the coup in Ukraine.
its so odd how we can use rationality to describe our collective insanity.
A stream of assumptions and further assumptions. It isn’t all about power. States are not completely isolated. There are many multilateral agreements, trade dependencies, etc. Machiavelli is also realist, and focuses on how the ruler (domestic politics) drives ruler and state behaviour.
Amazingly explained
Aren't domestic politics more important right now for example in the United States for example because of the political divisions? It seems to me foreign policy decisions are actually being made more often based on how politicians think it will help them reelected instead of what's in the country's best interest.
That is one reason why authoritarian countries tend to have an easier time engaging in long term planning. However, we can also see how for example americas foreign policy differs surprisingly little regardless of who is in power. But as he said there are instances where unique domestic events causes unexpected international actions. However, this is an oddity and not the norm.
What a great explanation.
Apart from of his great mind, he has incredibly nice, warm personality...
If this anarchy applies on every state and the goal is to "survive", another way to survive will be to cooperate. Then why do states go for power politics rather than going for cooperation? I'm trying to figure out whether anarchy is the "only" factor or the important factor?
Aaqib Bhat ::
Your alternative ( "to cooperate" ) is much-more civilized, especially w / International Relations. The fact that these "leaders" prefer power-politics is the main reason we have had centuries of wars & destruction ; secondly, Mearsheimer describes anarchy as no higher authority to protect States ; so, seeking power is the goal of States, for protection in the absence of a higher-authority ( anarchy ).
First ::
Where, Who & What is this "higher-authority" ?
It seems that _only one_ higher-authority can exist. Who gives it that authority ?
Second ::
His definition of anarchy is questionable.
"No God's ! No Masters !" is the leading force of Anarchists' Idealogy. His definition is kinda limited & a-historical, I think.
Third ::
I also think they choose power over cooperation because they are Hegemonic Imperial-Powers & they have no interest in cooperation ; capitulation is their ambition.
When the United States invades other countries ; over-turns Democratically-Elected Governments & supports the most dictatorial of Dictators in the place of that Democratically-Elected Government. She can't then claim "cooperation" AND definitely can't produce evidence _that country was a threat._
Because its impossible to know the true intentions of states.
You'd have to look into things like "game theory" and the "prisoners dilemma" to understand why cooperation is not the default position of states in an anarchic system, at least when it comes to security
As Mearsheimer says, it is impossible to truly know another state's intentions. So the safest thing to do is to be strong enough to deter attacks
@@cliffgaither
I don't think you really understand what Mearsheimer is saying
@@stevencoardvenice ::
Well then ... explain his statement ... don't leave me hangin'.
I studied international politics for 6 years in college and never bothered to check UA-cam. I wish I found this earlier, as I'd have been a whole lot more interested. All I read of him was boring slides my lecturers put together, and other scholars quoting him in their own work.
A state wants to be a Godzilla in the International System in order to survive. This is phenomenal of Professor John Mearsheimer as he simplified the complex understanding of an anarchic international system.
You know what the best book is? It's "the Three Body System", it's a si-fi but it invented the dark forest theory, which is Neorealism between planets.
2:27 The world is an amazingly complicated place
we try to understand this amazingly complicated place with theories
This theory essentially displays the need for a UN council and peacekeeping force that actually works.
Creating a UN with a capable force to challenge any state on the planet is not possible. The only "force" that can come close to this is public opinion.
contradiction: UN creates next level of hierarchy , neorealism is not applicable
@@yuritatarnikov4818Realism always applies. Consider the new Hierarchy gets exposed as a creation of the UN to make their power, public opinion/perception would change.
@@jalllaaavg missed important statement: neorealism is about absence of referee
@@yuritatarnikov4818 And the referee is public opinion.
Thanks...
That someone has to explain this stuff to young people shows just how badly they've been raised in a universalist morality cocoon.
My man!
4 books to read :Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan; Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (1959), Man, the State and War (1979); Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.
Isn’t it the case that clusters of states do have a common organizing principle in the form of some ideology or philosophy of life? I.e. religion or political ideologies?
Granted, there are multitude of such ideologies, therefore anarchy relative to clusters.
As a lay person he shows you how to look at the world in ways you had never considered.
He is my hero
3:51
subfield is international security
I'm an Indian, thankful to you❤
Is offensive realism and neorealism the same thing?
they will compete with each other for power as power is indispensable for survival. power is a goal as per neorealism. you make yourself as powerful as you can, you aspire to become a godzilla.
two terms like the architecture or international system.
we need theory to learn how the world works
why we need theory
to understand how the world works.
policymakers and all try to make sense and know what are the organizing forces that drive reality.
theories are simplifications of reality help to make sense of the world.
what are the right and wrong policies that a state should design
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
No higher authority ; No rules ; Competition ; Survival of the Strongest ; POWER and MORE POWER the better . Y E H ! ! !
THAT'S NEOREALISM. Not only that it is what's being practiced by some powerful countries now but YOU in fact sound like YOU are an
ADVOCATE of it too ! ! !
he didn't even say the word HEGEMONY once in 10 minutes!!!! it must be a record!!
I'm as good as I'm required to be
limitations
it pays little attention to domestic politics, it sometimes really matters.
6:48
Where fits Nietsche in all of this? And how much sense he made of the world?
state behaves according to the architecture of international systems. Anarchy - there is no higher authority that sits above them. that can protect state if they get in trouble
they will compete with each other for power as power is indispensable for survival. power is a goal as per neorealism. you make yourself as powerful as you can, you aspire to become a godzilla.
two terms like the architecture or international system.
we need theory to learn how the world works
So this guy just re-packaged (plagiarized) Carl Schmitt's 'Concept of the Political'?
True, still structural realism is based
@@thatguys4341 Yes it is.
I would say he repackaged it for the IR theory crowd. Schmitt was more of a political scientist than an IR theorist. That said, Mearsheimer cites Schmitt extensively in his works (most notably, in "The Great Delusion"). Also, in "Tragedy of Great Power Politics", Mearsheimer provides IR-based evidence for his theory of "offensive realism", whereas Schmitt operated mainly in the realm of conjecture - as political scientists do.
🙏🏻I tried calling and writing on if’s there’s no cause there’s no effect happening. I tried to make the democratic change at your attitude aggression against humanity for the sanctioning leadership which was made mount of effect against humanity, even the little thing with the Pipeline rights, they made themselves efforts against the humanity effectively to be refugees and no avoiding to let the war’s crimes going especially for the USA and their alliance.
States need too allow the resources too guide their political policies and respect the earth.
It's a dog eat dog world where life is nasty, brutish and short.
Powerful theory, so far as World events go, but if we discount (send to the "cutting room floor") domestic situations, policy, etc. then there can & will develop severe myopia in each nation, which would extend to regions - and further, rendering a theory less comprehensive (say, 25% less?)...
The best part of what Prof. Mearseimer does say here is the admission that it will be wrong 25% of the time - neoliberalism & neoconservativism never admit anything like this.
Only domestic peoples' dissent can curb external excesses.
And that's where everyone seems to fail - allowing heads of state to direct all blame outward, and internal populations to be dominated by fictitious propaganda.
To ignore our own failings at home (any nation) creates easy conditions for bad internal policies to fester, making bad external policies the go-to scapegoat.
Yes. If realism is not the departure point and foundation of your international relations analysis, then you will lead your country to disaster
A true thought leader. Would want to know where he stands wrt the Putin war in Ukraine.
Realisim is just objectively true, i am always amazed how many people think its different in the modern world 😂. No hard power is still as important as ever.
HOW STATES work, depends on the empire at the time.
which WILL fall.
Why is it “neo”? What was old realism and how is new realism different?
It's just semantics.
I read Professor John Mearsheimer's book "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics", and other articles for my Bachelors degree in Political Science and International Relations, and in some of my first and second year Masters course modules in International Relations/Global Political Economy. I am a realist /marxist academic..🤩
kys commie
John Mearsheimer is a liberal hegemon whithout a peer competitor, with no security threat in the region - no others to roam into the backyard.
...
Stay well. Peace.
Eleonora Formato née Szczepanowski
South Australia
9:14 min ... book list.
Okay, Hobbs' book is available on Gutenberg, now that I peeked into it, I have the impression Mearsheimer used it to promote his own book. Hobbs is definitely too far from our contemporary mind set to qualify as easy reading ;-)
Also, it's quite funny to promote a book published in 1651 as reading for 'NEO'-anything.
Theories are useful, yes, and neorealism is a useful theory to contemplate. But, theories also limit our thinking as much as they support it.
Let's be clear: we don't want higher authorities.
0:40 there can't be anarchy if there's 5 UN countries with the possibility to veto. The 188 other countries are in fact hierarchically overpowered by USA, UK, France, China and Russia.
This is just an modern explanation of nicolau Maquiavel book .
Chad
Insanity is the wisdom of the day !
We haven't changed since the Roman Age
Neorealism
Power is the Key
War is the Tool
Idiots
Need a new reality
When God is abandoned only insanity or cynicism remain to battle for the soul's supremacy.
He is one of the best political scientists ever, and my favorite in the west.
"international security"... "international political economy"...
IT'S IMPERATIVE
that no EurAsian challenger emerges capable of dominating EurAsia and thus of also challenging America
-
Zbignew Brzezinski ( Nicholas J Spykman)
No use speaking on YT - YOU need bigger audience, international audience, - - we must understand what's going on and the reasons so that we can speak out and march on the streets -
Constructivism is the only relevant IR theory
I may sound egotistical if I plug my own book but I'm doing it anyway
Sounds like evolutionary theory, this neorealism.
Janitorial Maintenance (IX;) 7W in othe words Seven in the Morning.Joe #Moe&Joe Copitolcapital.
Money Gun, #TheDevilWearsPrada ahv; ebhvlpahvu : eahvss, cv3dv.
This is the classic realism and nothing new really.
Let me enlighten you God is coming and time is running out And every one in the world is going to STAND before God and be Judged JESUS or satani promote Jesus!
Study the Fathers of Anarchy...
so true what he says, given what happened to Ukraine! They tried to call 911, ie USA/Nato but there was no protection, just opportunists jumping in to see if they could gain more for their own interests.Those who truly wanted to help, hit the wall of nuclear war risk and escalation, so yeah...
There doesn't appear much difference between realism and neo- realism
Neorealism: would best serve if it were a literary movement rather than an apology to Gringo hegemony.
You can get some people to subscribe to any IR school/ theory if you put "why west is to blame" in the title... never knew there where so many "realists" out there!
Appeasement
A humble man with an evil theory 😅
Or simply a realist theory about an evil international structure
sounds like an excuse for having a global government. No thanks. I'd rather have no global government...aka "anarchy" at the global level. anarchy just means no government.
They can't find a questioner that has a voice that you can hear. making a production with a mouse voice asking the questions!
Seek Allah !
This crass amoral theory is impotent to explain the international framework of states, the role of a right of self-determination in international
law and the behaviour of state actors, or much else actually. This discussion is especially poor. Mearsheimer chooses his own example, the rise of China, and claims neorealism can predict whether it will be peaceful. But then he says nothing at all, not surprisingly, since the claim that the theory can answer that question is bogus. He acknowledges that the theory is a simplification, and gives an example of domestic politics as falling outside the theory. That's actually a devastating failure, since domestic politics is the best predictor of foreign policy. Yet that's the least of the theory's problems. It leaves out morality, self-consciously, pugnaciously. But as a result, it can't account for why little states survive. Why is there a Denmark or an Iceland, or most other states in the world for that matter? Are they striving for more "power"? And why haven't bigger states annexed them, if those bigger states are striving for greater power? For this theory, there is no fundamental difference between the democracies and despotic regimes, between despot Putin invading a democracy and outraged democracies rallying to the invaded country's side: for Mearsheimer and his dumb theory, those are all just power plays of the same kind.
Just another moralless right wing.
Grow up
Truth don't care about virtue signalling clowns like you.
He actually isn't right wing, he is a Bernie supporter. (At least from his Wikipedia site) He just has a very nihilistic outlook of foreign policy.