E.H. Carr's the Twenty Years

E.H. Carr's the Twenty Years Crisis Carr, E.H. The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan. 2001. Carr was one of the founding voices in the establishment of international relations as an autonomous process. His work, the Twenty Years' Crisis, was published in 1939 right before the second Word War. It was fundamental in defining issues that had weakened previous attempts and constructing progressive international relations and cooperation between very different societies.

The period after World War I was actually not as successful as many believed it was at the time in succeeding to implement lasting peace strategies. Unfortunately the reality of the deep international divides was simply too great for the well thought out, yet still ineffective peace measures taken during the period. Carr's major structure of his word is the criticism of the prevalent optimism that often got in the way of actually crafting more realistic peace strategies that may have helped avoid the outbreak of World War II in 1939.

His argument opposes the exaggeration of these mentalities in the structure of international politics. International relations were impacted by the exaggerated sense of utopia and optimism that failed to highlight the serious issues that were occurring and setting the groundwork for future conflict. In this environment, relations between nations were simple. Most of the time, they were serving the self-interest of the majority countries controlling the influence over the international organizations meant to facilitate communications and cooperation. Carr uses several examples to illustrate his points within the work.

First, he invokes the liberal international economic system. This was prevalent during the period between the two world wars. It is a system that is not mutually benefit to different economic systems that differed from a more liberally-based free market, like those found in most Western nations. As such, the very system that was supposed to be uniting nations under a beneficial foundation was only furthering the distance between Western and nonwestern economies in the international environment.

Secondly, Carr invokes the image of the infamous League of Nations and the exaggerated international optimism it represented. Here, he criticizes treaties and agreements that had tried to prevent further global conflict. Philosophies for these strategies were based on an unsound structural foundation. These organizations were essentially trying to impose their, predominately Western, attitude on the global arena without much regard for differing voices in the international community.

However, this top down approach will not work until the real work of getting more states in agreement in terms of international relations and communications. Lofty "elegant superstructures," like the League of Nations simply were unable to reach as many nations as they could have if they would have been more attentive to local demands and needs (Carr XXVI). It is clear that Carr was demanding a more realistic viewpoint and away from the foolish utopian optimism that was proving so ineffective.

However, Carr is not advocating that we adopt an amoral set of principles when dealing with international politics. Rather, he does present a clear case for including underlying moral tones in how international relations are constructed and executed. Yet, these only have a certain part to play. Exaggerating that portion through unrealistic utopian ideology proves to lead to the failure of the peace attempts during the twenty years Carr describes in crisis. In this, he is also criticizing the other end of the spectrum in terms of utopian ideology.

Carr aims to discredit some of the misconceptions brought about by a more extreme realistic approach that was also failing to provide progressive results. Political philosophies are often in order to gain power over other nations. Thus, they can be very easily molded into oppressive or aggressive strategies if not restrained by some sort of moral guidance. Carr believed that strategies born out of this self serving pragmatic approach were failing just as much as their utopian counterparts.

Carr's personal belief is that international politics are heavily dependent on the presence of power structures and how they interact within an international context. Methods of power include military, economic, ideological, and judicial. By manipulating the balance between these structures of power, more efficient strategies in international relations can take shape. Essentially, Carr was advocating the balance of these power structures with an appropriate, but realistic, moral foundation makes for the best environment to facilitate cooperation between nations.

Even in a modern context, Carr's argument is both viable and well conceived. He presents his argument in a progressive structure, offering criticism of current systems but with his own recommendations for change. It is impressive in how he aims to secure an autonomous role.