Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Hobbes and the Concept of Political Realism

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Thucydides, Machiavelli & Hobbes and the Tradition of Classical Political Realism
Introduction
Classical Realism is an international relations theory that attempts to explain the true nature of humans in light of meeting their interests. The theory is part of the realist school of thought, which is based on the assumption that states are the main actors at the international level. The theory suggests that there is no supranational international authority and that states act in their own self-interest. The model believes that all states at the international level prioritize on their self-interests and will take any opportunity available to them to take power for self-preservation. This form of realism differs from the other forms of realism as it mainly focuses on the nature of humans and the domestic politics as the defining feature of the state behavior and the main causes of inter-state conflicts. The classical realist theory adopts a negative perception of the human nature. It categorizes humans as organisms whose prioritizes on their self-interests and will either act out of fear or aggression in safeguarding those interests.
History
Classical Realism began during the interwar period between 19918 and 1939 as an academic field established to study and understand international relations. The classical realism model arose to counter the idealist and utopian theories that had excess prominent at the time. During this period, conflicts were common among different countries as well as communities. The liberal scholars, who were tasked with understanding the causes of the conflicts and how to solve them attributed them to poor social conditions and political systems. During this period, international relations were growing as countries began trading with each other more extensively. However, this trade was also accompanied by the desire by some states to amerce as much wealth as possible. The more powerful nations explored nations that were weak and had more resources in an attempt to establish their control over those states. It was during this time that conflicts among the states increased more significantly and liberal scholars opted to research on the concept and try to establish a solution.
Realism, Liberalism, and the Concept of Peace
The field of international relations features several general theories and theoretical perceptions regarding the international relations. Realism, which is also called political realism, is a perception of international politics that stresses its competitive and conflictive side of the nature of humans. On the contrary, idealism or liberalism tends to focus on cooperation. According to realists, states are the principle actors on the international level and each one is concerned about their own interests. However, realism is not only focused on self-interest, but is also concerned about the morality of the actions. The type of realism that does not acknowledge the presence of ethics is what is called radical or extreme realism. The classical realists do not dispute the possibility of the use of morals in rendering judgment. Instead, these theorists are more critical about moralism. Among the founding fathers of realism include Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Hobbes. However, the twentieth-century classical realism has mainly been replaced by neorealism, which has tried to embrace a more scientific approach towards understanding the concept of international relations. The international relations theorists representing liberal, critical, and post-modern perspectives have been critical of the classical and neorealism.
On the contrary, liberalism operates on the moral argument that ensuring a person’s right to life, liberty, and property is the main goal of any government. Therefore, according to liberals, any action that states or governments take should be inspired by the need to attain the appropriate wellbeing of its individuals. Thus, a political system that is characterized by ungoverned power, such as dictatorships, cannot purport to protect the life of its citizens. The main goal of liberalists is to create an institution with the goal of protecting individuals interests by checking and reducing the political power. All governments in the modern system have liberals, which are often led by human rights groups. The main goal of these groups is to ensure that governments do not misuse their powers and abuse its citizens. Liberals are also concerned with international relations because a government’s activities abroad can have a significant impact on its liberty at home. Liberals are often more concerned by states that invest more in their military power. They perceive such powers as instruments that the said states can use either to fight foreign nations or to oppress its own citizens. Consequently, political systems that are based on liberalism tend to limit their military power by taking measures such as ensuring civilian control over the military.
Liberals are also disturbed by actions such as territorial expansions as such actions often brew conflicts and the people who eventually suffer from such conflicts are the citizens. The expansionist wars are ideas of the realists as they focus on strengthening the state at the expense of the people. Such wars also call for prolonged commitments, which means that people do not get an opportunity to engage in their normal activities such as trade. On the contrary, the political class are not affected by such conflicts because they can use the state resources to travel anywhere they desire. Unfortunately for the citizens, the interference on international trade or even domestic movements means that they cannot access some of their services. The people end up suffering from inability to access crucial services and hence the tendency of the liberals to discourage any actions that may lead to such conflicts.
Therefore, liberals are more concerned with developing a political system with an ability to protect themselves from external threats without interfering with the freedom of its citizens. In the contemporary world, many nations operate on realism. However, the difference in these states depend on the strength of the liberal bodies. Nations that are more democratic have strong liberal entities who advocate for the rights of the citizens. In such countries, government action that threatens citizens are discouraged. On the contrary, states that tend to be more militaristic, such as North Korea, have weak liberals and excessively strong realists. Consequently, the main goal of such governments is to protect the interests of the few capitalists at the expense of the majority citizens. Such nations, are known to invest more in military equipment, such as nuclear tools and firearms. The goal of these countries is to protect the resources managed by the state and the leaders go to any extend, including harming the citizens, to protect their interests. For example, despite the numerous sanctions imposed on a country such as North Korea, its leadership remains undisturbed because the state actors can access anything they desire. Instead, the sanctions only affect the citizens, which is against the liberal’s desires.
Basis of the Realist Tradition
Thucydides is one of the prominent classical realist theorists who perceived politics as involving moral questions. The theorists inquires whether relationships among states that perceive power as an essential tool can also rely on the justice norms. Thucydides unveiled his theory, which was known as the Thucydides Trap, a term that Graham T. Allison, a popular American political scientist popularized as he attempted to explain the tendency of stated to gravitate towards war whenever there occurs an emerging power that threatens to displace the existing great power either as a regional or an international hegemon. This concept was based on the tendency of countries to amerce power and to oppress any nation that appeared to be a threat to the status quo.
Realists believe that the international relations is governed by politics, which is determined by the nature of human beings. According to these theorists, international relations are characterized by the egocentric nature of humans, who are mainly driven by the desire to advance their individual interests. The international platform serves as the platform that reveals these traits because it lack an international government to regulate these behaviors. Consequently, there occurs a conflict-based paradigm of international relations in which the main actors are the states, whose main driving forces are power and security. This model assumes that states will go to great extents to capture power and boost their individual security and be able to access more resources. Consequently, there is little space for morality in the above case. Instead, the state actors operate on the concept of egoism, anarchy, power, security and morality that define the realist tradition are all available in Thucydides. According to realists, human beings are inherently egocentric to an extent that their focus on self-overrides the moral principles. Thucydides describes the debate in Sparta in his Book 1 called History, in which the Athenians affirm their focus on self-interest over morality. They state that the consideration of what is right or wrong have never turned people aside from the opportunities of aggrandizement offered by superior strength.
Thucydides theory has been at play even in the modern world, in which states continue to focus on their self-interests rather than morality. In the contemporary world, countries are more focused on their ability to achieve power that will allow them to control the world resources and the people’s interests are not given any priorities. Today, China is consistently rising as it focuses on gaining control over the international markets. The nation is investing its resources significantly, especially in developing nations that have rich resources. While China entices these nations with good loans, its ultimate goal is to gain as much control as possible of the nations in the world. China has continuously used this approach to access precious minerals in countries that it has advanced the loans. Whenever the state accepts to get into an agreement with China, it has to place some of its properties as collateral in the event that the state will be unable to service the loan. China’s ultimate goal is to overthrow the United States as the world superpower. However, the United States will not stand by and watch as power is taken away from them. Thucydides provides a great prediction of what the situation might turn out to be if China continues with its efforts to amerce resources and gain more power. Thucydides writes that “It was the rise of Athens and the fear that this instilled in Sparta that made war inevitable.” Therefore, the United States and China are embroiled in the Thucydides Trap, which begs the question of how to bring the two states together to resolve the issue more amicably. The two nations will only be able to avoid the impending conflict if they will be able to learn from history.
According to realists, the current tension being witnessed between the United States and China is because of the absence of a government to control the political interests that each nation has. The absence of a common oversight body to enforce the authority on international relations means that the more powerful nations control the systems and have turned the international arena into a self-help system. Each state advances policies that will protect its interests, rather than advocating for the good of the entire all parties. Consequently, the system is characterized by anarchy in which the main focus of the nations is to amerce power as it is the determining factor in their ability to control the resources. As the Athenian envoys at Melos note, “the independent states survive only when they are powerful”(5.97). Based on this approach, realists perceive the world as being anarchic and regard security as a central issue. States try to increase their security by increasing their power and engaging in power-balancing acts with a view of barring their adversaries. Countries use both violent and nonviolent techniques to prevent competing nations from becoming stronger. For example, the constant wars in the Middle East could be resulting from a silent war between two nations, in which one nation fears the threat of being overwhelmed and hence uses both the military and sanctions to ensure that it keeps the competitor in control.
Realists do not believe in the presence of morality at the international level. They have used this argument to claim that the international relations do not have a place for morality. Morality comes as a secondary factor in the achievement of individual state resources and power. The nations that control the world systems will use power and force to control the resources and once they are sure that they have the control of the world, they will then switch to morality in an attempt ...