“Human
history is, in essence, a history of ideas.” – H.G. Wells
The prolific English writer could not have put it
better. Ideas are the beginning points, the building blocks to every action
that has taken place over time. Prioritizing ideas over material forces is
known as the idealist approach. Interests of actors are then constructed based
on these ideas. This is called the structuralist approach. These two approaches have been combined
together to be called ‘Structural Idealism’ by Alexander Wendt, in his book ‘Social
Theory of International Politics’ published in 1999.
According to a recent survey carried out by Foreign Policy, Alexander Wendt is known
to be the third most influential scholar in the field of International
Relations. He has talked about the constructivist thinking which was largely
seen by the end of the Cold War in 1989. Wendt has presented the version of
constructivist thinking which he deems as credible, focusing mainly on the
ontology and epistemology, highlighting examples from the international
politics and the theory of IR.
Unlike neorealism as explained by Kenneth Waltz in ‘Theory
of International Politics’, which focuses on the negative characteristics of
the international system and claims that states are inherently egoistic and
work on a self-help system, Wendt’s theory makes the international system open
to a positive change. His theory mainly stresses on the combined effect rather
than individualism as explained in neorealism. His
theory encapsulates matters that neorealism cannot explain. It is a new
paradigm taking place.
Constructivism talks about ‘conceptualization of structure’,
similarly explained in sociology and anthropology. This school of thought believes
that the social world is in a constant process of construction done by people.
Constructivism does not believe that any given situation can exist timelessly
because all the activities in the social world are done by what humans have
constructed. Since there is a continuous flow of ideas, there will be
continuous construction and hence, continuous change.
However, there is one major flaw in his theory. It
does not include the notion of human, which is of utmost importance for
constructivism to attain its fundamental concept – process. The theory suggests
that states are in an endless process of constructing the international system.
This key point is challenged by the absence of human in his theory and hence it
cannot achieve the position where it can expect the change of the international
system. Even the author sees his flaw and calls his theory as ‘thin
constructivism’. Wendt has cramped in too many theories in one chapter, in his
attempt to relate and analyze constructivism in relation to all of them.
Wendt’s work is mainly of theoretical nature. He has
built and revised the international relations as an academic and scientific discipline.
In his book, he has sought to challenge the core neorealist premise that
anarchy forces states into recurrent security competitions. While people were
busy debating about liberalism vs. realism, Alexander Wendt introduced a
completely new theory in the field of international relations. It stands out
like a moon among the stars. His words
and ideas have changed the way people now see the world.
I agree with the view that the inclusion of human is very important to construct efficacious theories! But I'm glad Wendt also shifted away from the monotonous Realism-Liberalism paradigm!
ReplyDeleteGood post. A few points of feedback/clarification.
ReplyDeleteRemember, Waltz argued that states are security seekers, but not necessarily egoistic. Next, by putting ideas at the center of his theory, isn't he in effect keeping humans at the core of his theory? After all these ideas are in our heads and that is where they come from. Finally, I like you the "moon among the stars" analogy. Very nice!