Gilpinian Realism and International Relations

I argue that realism in particular and IR more generally erred by assigning Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Relations pride of place in revivifying realist thought. Had Robert Gilpin’s War and Change in World Politics been given equal billing, international relations research would have unfo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International relations (London) 2011-12, Vol.25 (4), p.499-511
Main Author: Wohlforth, William C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Academic discipline
Balance of Power
Gilpin, Robert
Intellectual development
Intellectuals
International Relations
International relations theory
Nation state
Neorealism
Paradigms
Policy studies
Power
Realism
Relations between the powers
Research priorities
Structural change
Waltz, Kenneth
War
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:I argue that realism in particular and IR more generally erred by assigning Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Relations pride of place in revivifying realist thought. Had Robert Gilpin’s War and Change in World Politics been given equal billing, international relations research would have unfolded quite differently over the past three decades. Scholars would not have been bewildered by change, bewitched by the balance of power, blind to numerous potentially powerful realist theories, and bothered by endless and unproductive zero-sum debates among representatives of competing paradigms. And had all those pathologies been absent, we would be far better prepared today for the intellectual and policy challenges of a world in which underlying power balances appear to be changing quickly, and the status quo inter-state order is ever more contested.
ISSN:0047-1178
1741-2862
DOI:10.1177/0047117811411742