Global Socioeconomic Perspectives Political Realism

Global Socioeconomic Perspectives

Political realism is a philosophy typically used in State and International relations that tends to prioritize national interest and security over moral and ethnical, and even social concerns. Modern political scientists often refer to it as power politics and hold several assumptions that make up the world-view of realpolitik: Humanity is in a constant state of anarchy and needs controlled; States are only rational when they are secure; Relations between States, as with people, are based on levels of power; and the International System is like a template that controls the actions of society (Bacevick, 2005). Where did this view originate, though -- and how has it evolved through the centuries?

In the Renaissance, for instance, classical Greek philosophers like Aristotle were read as texts for human development. For Renaissance writer and philosopher Mahiavelli, the approach to realism was based on a simple approach to the political struggle between individuals, often based and expanded from Aristotle. Aristotle's approach to politics was to use reason and logic, Machiavelli to use empiricism. Aristotle wanted definitions and conclusions that could be imparted generally, Machiavelli wanted specific results. Aristotle saw humans as political animals, with the goal of politics as the "good life." So, political structures are in place to create a society in which the citizenry prosper. Machiavelli was more a tactician -- politics is quite simple -- control, stability, and the essence of power. For Machiavelli, "The fact is that a man who wants to act virtuously in every way necessarily comes to grief among so many who are not virtuous. Therefore if a prince wants to maintain his rule he must be prepared not to be virtuous and to make use of this or not according to need" (65). Aristotle viewed citizens as the backbone of the state, and considered that they had a clear responsibility to said State. "One citizen differs from another…the salvation of the community is the common business of them all" (Politics, 54). Thus, the Aristotelian approach is one of natural law and natural predisposition; for Machiavelli, politics are constructed.

Similarly, when Thomas Hobbes described the life of man in wartime as "nasty, brutish, and short," he was speaking more about the manner in which the majority of the population lived in 16th and 17th century Europe. Life was quite different during this time for 90% of the populace; there was a small merchant/middle class, an even smaller aristocratic class, and a large peasant and poor class. And what was urban life like? Cities were crowded, there was no sewer system or plumbing; night soil and trash was thrown out of windows onto the streets, horse offal was everywhere. Refrigeration did not exist, meat was fly ridden and often rotten by the time it was purchased, produce similarly so. There was no regular medical care, most people had few teeth left by age of 30, pox, disease, and deformity were rampant, and the stench of the cities has been described as worse than rot, worse than privy smells, the odor seemed to hang on the city like a cloud of filth (Cockayne, 2007). Thus, for Hobbes, his view of mankind was not pleasant -- but it was real. The state of humanity, that he saw, was one in which technology had not yet had the pleasant effects for the majority, and he saw the masses as being born with an instinct that needed to be controlled, ruled, and that the responsibility of the State