Session 17: Bulletproof ideas

Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof. – V,  V From Vendetta

In this article by Alexander Wendt, the author tries to outline the weaknesses of neorealism and neoliberalism in the wake of the Cold War. He simultaneously presents a new concept in our course that gives us a welcome break from realism. This theory is known as constructivism. He outlines the state centric approach to IR theory and presents a constructivist diagnosis to it.

Is our understanding of anything socially constructed? To truly understand the international system, not to bandy about trying to make theories and anarchic systems for simplicity’s sake, it is important to understand that the concept of states is socially constructed to at least some extent. “Anarchy is what states make of it.” This was a hallelujah moment for me in this course.

 I’ve always been a big believer in the social construction of knowledge after falling in love with Sadaf Ahmad’s anthropology course in which we studied the different schools of anthropological thought on the origin of culture and how our minds originate it. So to receive confirmation that somewhere along the line, IR theorists stopped and said, “Hang on a second, this is purely ontological. Anarchy does exist but it is more conceptual than material. There are no unemployed people in Say Anything shirts in the international system.” The state and the state system is a tool for understanding and has to be used but not without conceding the facts. Constructivism makes sense.

This is why Wendt does not believe in discounting state centric models in favour of neo realist thought. Similarly, Wendt also argues that studying the state system is necessary too. It is also a factor in understanding the international system. The inclusion of both in moderated forms shows that this is indeed a more ‘social’ theory of international politics. Wendt sounds like a really nice guy. He’s so sweet in the way he always wants to take everyone along. He’s never too hardline. In fact, he’s such a strong believer in relative ontologies that he repeatedly refers to constructivism as just another ontology.

It’s refreshing to read a whole new approach on how to study IR. Wendt brings down the Berlin wall of entrenched ideas and provides something IR desperately needs i.e. context. It also shows that the international system does have anarchy but not just anarchy. There is no fixed structure binding the international system together. It is all relative. And how can you set limits on something which may or may not exist? It's the power of ideas. The Matrix isn't real. And there is more than one person named Neo (neoliberalism and neorealism) now.