Estefania Velez, GVPT200 Constructivism

Estefania Velez

GVPT 200 – Shirk

Tickner p.15-28

            The constructivist theory that Ann Tickner supports in “A Critique of Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism” depicts the way international relations should be in today’s world. While Morgenthau claims that power is defined by the self-interest of every state, Tickner believes that power should not be a competition but instead a collaboration between states. Tickner’s cooperative strategy allows for a more globalized perspective on how to make ends meet for most states without having to go to war or live in fear of being attacked by other great powers.

            Tickner is correct when she says that international relations are mainly dominated by a masculine standpoint because society associates femininity with staying at home and taking care of the kids while the men work and make the laws. If these masculine and feminine traits were combined, international relations would become more appropriate for the nations and the political standpoints that exist today because there needs to be a balance between the dichotomies that society has created for men and women.

Realism was a suitable theory back when the United States was part of the isolationism movement because it supports the idea that states put their self-interests and security before anything else. However, things have changed since then and the United States, along with many other states, have formed alliances to maintain peace and not live in fear of being spontaneously attacked by one of their allies. Tickner’s proposal is to be on good terms with other states as a way to maintain security and allies. This is the correct path to choose because it is important to find common ground and not let nuclear weapons become involved. If states continue to increase their power by increasing their security, things could get dangerous for the world because of the accessibility that many states have to nuclear and chemical weapons.

Because Morgenthau believes that power is based on who has the most control over others, he defends the claim that states act aggressively towards one another in order to survive. This way of thinking not only limits the amount of allies that each state has, but blocks ties that could be of use in the global economy, culture and/or politics. The reality, as Tickner emphasizes, is that states need to work together to accept each other’s views and once this is done, those who share common beliefs will unite to strengthen their views. The world needs this type of perspective because, although it is impossible to know whether states have good or bad intentions, keeping an optimistic view and trying to work with them instead of against them will lead to a better outcome globally.

Constructivism is what is best for the world right now because we need a system that accepts everyone states views and ideas. Tickner’s views that knock down the stereotypes held for males and females in our society are required to balance out the realist theories that have played a large factor in international relations and in society. It is time to let realism go and allow a more understanding, open-minded theory influence the way global politics is defined. After all, there cannot be international relations if we allow realism’s security and power theories burn bridges that were never insubstantial to begin with.