| Summary/Abstract |
Realist scholars have frequently expressed their displeasure at the actual practice of foreign policy and urged states to act in ways that are more consistent with realist insights on the nature of international politics. What does this foreign policy activism tell us about realist theory? For many, realist foreign policy activism suggests that the realist intellectual project is internally contradictory. Realist activism is said to undermine contemporary realism's claims to explain international politics “as it really is” the scientific validity of its predictions, and its rejection of the view that discourse and debate can shape the practice and nature of politics. While this perspective raises important questions about the descriptive-explanatory components of realist thought, it also contributes to a mischaracterization of what realism is primarily about. This article argues that the realist intellectual project is less about building a scientific and empirically valid theory of international relations and more about shaping state behavior to handle the demands and rigors posed by an anarchic international system. Realist foreign policy activism highlights the deeply prescriptive nature of the realist intellectual project.
|