“The Poverty of Neorealism” by Richard Ashley is a critique
by the author on neorealism. He compares it to the critique by E. P. Thompson
of structural Marxism. Ashley, at first, talks about the reasons of why
neorealism as a theory was introduced. The inability of classical realism to describe
many of the events of international relations, led scholars to take on a
structural approach to realism.
The author in talking about the shortcomings of classical
realism gives many reasons. According to him the concepts of classical realism
are not applied consistently. The situation determines the applicability of
such concepts. Classical realists also tend to be unclear in distinguishing between
subjective and objective aspects in the international politics. He believes that
the theory of classical realism is not well grounded in social theory and lack
the insights from economics, psychology and sociology. And finally, Ashley
believes that classical realism ignores the economics processes and relations
since the theory is limited to the domains of politics and military.
The author then turns to the “orrery of errors” of
neorealism. One such error that Ashley points out is that neorealism is statist
or state centric. It gives a lot of significance to states and regards states
as unitary actors. Having studied the Bureaucratic Politics Model in class and
being a proponent of it, I believe that the role of players in a state, both
junior and senior, and their interests and ambitions cannot be disregarded. And
indeed, Ashley also points out some of the individual neorealists that hold the
view that states cannot be treated as unitary actors.
The reading, overall, broadens the understanding of
neorealism and allow us to view it from different perspectives.
No comments:
Post a Comment