It is often interesting to notice when people argue that some leaders or ordinary people have performed certain tasks or spoken certain words against the moral standards of the society. One finds it astonishing when scholars like E.H Carr follow such line of thinking inappropriate and say these ethical standards are mere fictions and do not entail reality. One feels hard to come to conclude that our historical process is not bounded by what our society has set standards for itself; however, the historical evolution is a mere deviation from such moral grounds.
Hence, one thinks if historical process is really a deviation of our values and beliefs, then how such system continues and progress over different periods and generations. One might argue that the historical process makes its continuation, because society constantly strives to attempt these values and beliefs and their success and failure forms the structure for the historical records. If one agrees on this notion then one feels save to conclude that Utopian ideology is entrenched into the societal procedures and realist critique of its value-system is only an explanation of that failure part of the historical records. To clarify, one means to say that realist ideology cannot take precedence over Utopian one, because people always look for some reference point in their lives to make their thoughts turn into action. Therefore, history may be seen as a success or failure of individuals in conforming to the requirements of moral grounds.
One can acknowledge the limitation of the argument that moral values of individuals are different from each other as Muslims in France ask for the permission of veil taking, whereas French government says it is oppressive and anti-democratic. In so far as this line of thought goes, one can say it is a matter of interests of the indigenous French that will be undermined if Muslim women are allowed to take veil. Thus, the above presented argument is limiting itself to those societal processes that a community with shared interests and values experience and attempt to conform its moral and ethical grounds. Their success and failure for odd reasons may explain their historical evolution in realist terms.
Hence, one thinks if historical process is really a deviation of our values and beliefs, then how such system continues and progress over different periods and generations. One might argue that the historical process makes its continuation, because society constantly strives to attempt these values and beliefs and their success and failure forms the structure for the historical records. If one agrees on this notion then one feels save to conclude that Utopian ideology is entrenched into the societal procedures and realist critique of its value-system is only an explanation of that failure part of the historical records. To clarify, one means to say that realist ideology cannot take precedence over Utopian one, because people always look for some reference point in their lives to make their thoughts turn into action. Therefore, history may be seen as a success or failure of individuals in conforming to the requirements of moral grounds.
One can acknowledge the limitation of the argument that moral values of individuals are different from each other as Muslims in France ask for the permission of veil taking, whereas French government says it is oppressive and anti-democratic. In so far as this line of thought goes, one can say it is a matter of interests of the indigenous French that will be undermined if Muslim women are allowed to take veil. Thus, the above presented argument is limiting itself to those societal processes that a community with shared interests and values experience and attempt to conform its moral and ethical grounds. Their success and failure for odd reasons may explain their historical evolution in realist terms.
I agree with what you've written and I believe that realism and utopianism should be studied together in order to understand the complexities of the real-world situations.
ReplyDeleteAlso, we should not draw conclusions by just studying the theory and we cannot completely isolate one school of thought from another.
ReplyDeleteI think its fine to utilize both realism and idealism to understand IR. However, your point about the varying levels of morality that exist within France is not really related to either realism or idealism. Although it is an interesting point, I'm not sure how it fits within the broader context of realism vs. idealism.
ReplyDelete