Session 19: The pitfalls of Neo Realism

Richard K. Ashley's article The Poverty of Neorealism aptly summarizes that pitfalls of the school. By pinpointing specific flaws in the school, the author very methodologically proves how the school is not the best one as it is extremely reductionist. By dissecting the different components of Neo Realism, the article was an interesting read as it provided an in depth view of the realist school.

The article begins by talking about how the Realist School disregards the economical basis of decisions. This steers the school towards being reductionist because how can one not consider the economics? In this day an age, nay, in every epoch of History, the economical considerations have perhaps been the most pertinent reason why one would get involved in a conflict: whether to protect the capitalistic economic ideology such as in the Cold War or to ensure hegemony as in the Russo-Japanese War of 1905. How can one then just disregard such an important aspect?

The author continues to claim how the neo realist school is very statist and only considers the importance of the state and how the state is elevated to the status of being the main political actor, which disregards the different other array of factors that go into making decisions. The Neorealist Theory is also criticized for being utilitarian which essentially means that it is very selfish at the end of the day and considers it's own maximization of power. Yes, this is true when applied to the real world, but the importance placed on it by Neorealist is too large.

This weeks article was very thought provoking because it shattered some of the illusions that I had as someone who had done realism in real depth in the previous sessions. One aspect which stood out the most was perhaps was the nonchalant handling of economics by Neorealist scholars, as such an important concept needs to be considered in every decision