Session 6 - A Feasible Mixture?

Can combining the assumptions of one theory with the goals and ideals of an opposing theory form a compatible and feasible mixture? This is exactly what John Hertz, is proposing to do in "Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma”. He feels that if we take the realistic assumptions of how the world is and how it does actually work and work on them with the lofty ideals of idealism/liberalism can we might be able to achieve a better realm of international politics. He calls this Realistic Liberalism.

He constructs his argument well. He looks at international realm through the lens of security dilemma and gives convincing evidence of how movements of internationalism both in the realist and liberal discourse have failed due to it. He finds his evidence in history; the failures of the French and Bolshevik revolution in their inability to make an impact beyond national boundaries are great examples used by him to show how internationalism has been failing thus far and why.

His suggestion to take the strengths of both theories and combing them to eliminate the others’ weaknesses seems like a good solution. Unfortunately, what is lacking is the feasibility of his proposal. Can such a mixture even be achieved? He never addresses the practicality of it even though he discusses the impracticality of other theories with good evidence. Perhaps this problem is due to the limited nature of the essay as just an introduction and more in depth reading and research is needed. Nonetheless what he is proposing certainly fascinated me enough to what to know more about it, its practical implications and further study of its research if there is any because it seems like an interesting way of expanding international political thought, study and perhaps practice in the future.