Dwi Ardiyanti, M.

Scholars in Realism,
liberalism,
constructivism

Types of Realism
Naive Realism
This theory is also known as direct realism or common sense realism.
Naive realism holds that the view of the world that we derive from our senses is to be taken at face value: there are objects out
there in the world, and those objects have the properties that they appear to us to have. If I have an experience as of a large
apple tree, then thats because theres a large apple tree in front of me. If the apples on the tree appear to me to be red, then
thats because there are objects in front of me, apples, that have the property redness; simple.
Plausible though naive realism may be, it has serious problems, among which is the problem of the variability of perception. The
same object may appear differently to different people, or to the same person at different times. The apples may appear to be
red in the daytime, but at dusk they are a shade of grey. If naive realism is to be taken seriously, and colours are out there in the
world, then apples regularly change colour depending on how much light is around them. It is much more plausible, though, to
think that the apples are the same as they ever were, that all that has changed is our experience of them.

Representative Realism : Primary and Secondary Qualities

According to representative realism, we do not perceive objects directly.
Rather, objects cause us to have certain experiences, sense-data, and it is
these to which we have direct access. Representative realism thus introduces
a distinction, not present in naive realism, between our experiences of
objects and the objects themselves. John Locke was a leading advocate of

Scholars in realism
Thomas

Hobbes
Hugo Grotius
Emmerich de Vattel
Niccolo Machiavelli
Hans Morgenthau
Kenneth Waltz

Thomas Hobbes (1588

1679)

In Leviathan, written during the English Civil Wars (1642-1651), Hobbes argues for the necessity and natural evolution
of the social contract, a social construct in which individuals mutually unite into political societies, agreeing to abide by
common rules and accept resultant duties to protect themselves and one another from whatever might come
otherwise. He also advocates rule by an absolute sovereign, saying that chaos--and other situations identified with a
"state of nature" (a pre-government state in which individuals' actions are bound only by those individuals' desires
and restraints)--could be averted only by a strong central government, one with the power of the biblical Leviathan (a
sea creature), which would protect people from their own selfishness. He also warned of "the war of all against all"
(Bellum omnium contra omnes), a motto that went on to greater fame and represented Hobbes' view of humanity
without government.

Hugely influential, Hobbes' ideas form the building blocks of nearly all Western
political thought, including the right of the individual, the importance of
republican government, and the idea that acts are allowed if they are not
expressly forbidden. The historical importance of his political philosophy cannot
be overstated, as it went on to influence the likes of John Locke, Jean-Jacques
Rousseau and Immanuel Kant, to name a few.

Hugo Grotius (1583-1645)

Hugo Grotius (miracle of Holland): just and limited war : Grotius sought to
achieve his practical objective to minimize bloodshed in wars by
constructing a general theory of law (jurisprudentia) that would restrain
and regulate war between various independent powers, including states.
Grotius placed natural law at the centre of his jurisprudentia.
He argued that a law deduced from mans inherent nature would have a
degree of validity Grotius designed his theory to apply not only to states
but also to rulers and subjects of law in general. De Jure Belli ac Pacis
thus proved useful in the later development of theories of both private and
criminal law. It is in the area of international law, however, that Grotiuss
masterpiece has been most influential. Its general normative framework
provided a foundation to constitute and regulate relations between
emerging sovereign states, which became the basic units of modern
international society.

Emmerich de Vattel (1714-1767)

and
Niccolo Machiavelli (1469- 1527)

Emmerich de Vattel : 1758; The Law of Nations), applied a theory of natural law to international
relations. His treatise was especially influential in the United States because his principles of liberty
and equality coincided with the ideals expressed in the Declaration of Independence. In particular,
his defense of neutrality and his rules for commerce between neutral and belligerent states were
considered authoritative in the U.S.
Vattel, however, rejected Wolffs conception of a regulatory world state, substituting national rights
and duties proceeding from his own view of the law of nature.
Niccolo Machiavelli : In 1503, one year after his missions to Cesare Borgia, Machiavelli wrote a
short work, Del modo di trattare i sudditi della Val di Chiana ribellati (
On the Way to Deal with the Rebel Subjects of the Valdichiana). Anticipating his later Discourses on
Livy, a commentary on the ancient Roman historian, in this work he contrasts the errors of Florence
with the wisdom of the Romans and declares that in dealing with rebellious peoples one must
either benefit them or eliminate them. Machiavelli also was a witness to the bloody vengeance
taken by Cesare on his mutinous captains at the town of Sinigaglia (December 31, 1502), of which
he wrote a famous account. In much of his early writings, Machiavelli argues that one should not
offend a prince and later put faith in him.

Hans Morgenthau (1904-1980)

and
Kenneth Waltz (1924-2013)

Hans

Morgenthau:

Politics Among Nations, Morgenthau

defined international politics as the struggle for power and power
politics. The aspiration for power, he wrote, is the distinguishing element
of international politics. The struggle for power, he continued, is universal
in time and space and is an undeniable fact of experience.
Six principles of political realism:
1. Politics is governed by objective laws that have their roots in

human nature.
2. Statesmen conduct themselves in terns of interest defined as
power.
3. Interest determines political conduct within the political and
cultural context which foreign policy is formulated.
4. Prudence is the supreme virtue in international politics.
5. Nations are entities that pursue their interests as defined by power
and should not be judged by universal moral principles.
6. Political realism rejects the legalistic-moralistic approach to
international politics.

Kenneth

waltz: The only thing that could be used to deal with the animus dominandi was

power, military, political or economic, to be wielded, when necessary, unflinchingly and without
scruple.
Theory

of International Politics shifted realism away from metaphysical speculation on human

nature and onto firmer ground by removing any need for a philosophical anthropology to explain
why international relations are as they are. Instead of a contentious account of man, Waltz
substituted a structural account of the international system that borrowed heavily from the theory
of the firm in classical economics.

Waltzs

structural realism attracted criticism from the start, and continues to do so today, almost
twenty-five years after Theory of International Politics was published. But it is impossible not to
acknowledge that it decisively shifted the terms of debate in international theory, returning
realism to the mainstream, where it has remained ever since. In the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, the
field was defined by a series of arguments between the realists and their critics, as first the neoliberal institutionalists and then various bands of constructivists, feminists, postmodernists and
critical theorists lined up to attack Waltz and his students.

Without

Waltz and without structural realism, we would have seen no offensive and neo-classical
realism, no agent-structure debate, and no anarchy is what states make of it. Whatever one
thinks about his revival of realism, and about the many responses to it, it is impossible to imagine
what IR would have looked like without Theory of International Politics, as well as Waltzs many
other works. For that reason alone, he will be remembered as one of the great thinkers of the field.

Scholars in Liberalism
John

Locke (16321704)
Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924)
Thomas Jefferson

John Locke
John

Locke : impact on Western thought. His theories concerning the

separation of Church and State, religious freedom, and liberty
Natural Rights
Locke wrote and developed the philosophy that there was no legitimate
government under the divine right of kings theory. The Divine Right of Kings
theory, as it was called, asserted that God chose some people to rule on earth
in his will. Therefore, whatever the monarch decided was the will of God.
When you criticized the ruler, you were in effect challenging God. This was a
very powerful philosophy for the existing ruler. But, Locke did not believe in
that and wrote his theory to challenge it.
Perhaps the part of Locke's writing which most influenced the founding
fathers of the United States Constitution was the idea that the power to
govern was obtained from the permission of the people.
He thought that the purpose of government was to protect the natural rights
of its citizens. He said that natural rights were life, liberty and property, and
that all people automatically earned these simply by being born. When a
government did not protect those rights, the citizen had the right and maybe
even the obligation of overthrowing the government.

Woodrow wilson

The world would look to America and Wilson's leadership to resolve the
First World War. Wilson's Fourteen Points Address of 1918 called for a
peace of reconciliation, based on democracy, self-determination,
without annexations and indemnities, and a postwar League of
Nations. The Paris Peace Conference in 1919 concluded with the
signing of the Versailles Treaty with Germany, but a new Republican
Congress at home was not in agreement with the peace negotiated
under Wilson, particularly with the League of Nations and collective
security aspects. Ultimately, a separate peace was negotiated between
the United States and Germany. Wilson was awarded the 1919 Nobel
Peace Prize, and heralded in Europe as a savior of peace.

Thomas Jefferson (17431826)

Drafted

declaration of independence of US from Great

Britain
Jefferson was the spokesman of liberty and a racist
slave owner, the champion of the common people and a
man with luxurious and aristocratic tastes, a believer in
limited government and a president who expanded
governmental authority beyond the wildest visions of
his predecessors, a quiet man who abhorred politics and
the most dominant political figure of his generation. The
tensions between Jefferson's principles and practices
make him all the more apt a symbol for the nation he
helped create, a nation whose shining ideals have
always been complicated by a complex history.

Realist and neorealist

First,

classical realist locate the roots of international conflict and war in

an imperfect human nature while neo-realists maintain that its deep
causes are found in the anarchic international system. Second, the state
is ontologically superior to the system in classical realism, in contrast to
neorealism, allowing more space for agency in the former approach
(Hobson, 2000: 17). Third, classical realists differentiate between statusquo powers and revisionist powers while neorealism regards states as
unitary actors (Schweller, 1996: 155). Fourth, neo-realists attempt to
construct a more rigorous and scientific approach to the study of
international politics, heavily influenced by the behaviourist revolution of
the 1960s while classical realism confine its analyses to subjective
valuations of international relations (Georg and Sorensen, 2007: 75).
The rest of this essay will focus on the merits of this orthodox
understanding of realism and contest some of the myths this process has
generated about realist thinkers. The first theme that will be analysed in
this spirit is Morgenthaus and Waltzs understandings of power.

30 Years War (16181648)

Continued..
Faktor

Eksternal pecahnya perang 30 tahun

Spanyol tertarik dengan Negara-negara Jerman karena letaknya dekat dengan Belanda utuk mengontrol Belanda.

Perancis

Swedia

diapit oleh dua wilayah diansti Habsburg (Spanyol dan Kekaisaran Romawi Suci)dan berhasrat untuk mendesak Negara-negara Jerman yang lebih lemah.

dan Denmark tertarik untuk mengusai Negara-negara Jerman yang berbatasan dengan Laut Baltik.

Jalan-Jalan Menunju peperangan bag.1

Quote:
Suasana perundingan Augsburg dimana setiap wakil negara2 Jerman berdiskusi mengenai perdamaian agama
Perdamaian Augsubrg (1555),yang ditandatangin oleh Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, sebagai hasil jawaban atas Penyerahan Speyer (1526), mengakhiri perang
antara orang Protestan dan Katolik di Jerman.Isi Perdamaian sebagai berikut:
Pemimpin setiap 225 kerajaan di Jerman harus memilih agama (Lutheranisme atau Katolik) pada kerajaan mereka sesuai dengan kata hati mereka, dan dapat
memaksa kepercayaanya kepada setiap warga Negaranya untuk mengikutinya (berdasarkan prinsip cuius regio, eius religio).
Pengikut Lutheran di sebuah Negara kepangeranan-keuskupan(sebuah Negara yang dipimpin uskup Katolik) bisa menjalankan kepercayaanya.
Penganut Lutheran bisa menjaga daerahnya dari perampasan oleh Gereja Katolik sejak Perjanjian Passau.
Pangeran atau Uskup yang pindah ke Lutheranisme harus menyerhakan wilayahnya.
Walaupun Perjanjian Augsburg mampu mengakhiri permusuhan (untuk sementara),perjanjian ini tidak menyelasaikan inti dari permasalahan. Perlu ditambahkan pula,
ajaran Calvinisme juga berkembang pesat. Menjadikannya sebagai aliran agama terbesar ketiga di Jerman, tapi posisinya tidak diakui dalam perjanjian Augsburg yang
hanya ditujukan antara Lutheranisme dengan Katolik.
Kekaisaran ROmawi Suci sendiri terdiri atas negara-negara besar yang merdeka.Posisi Kaisar romawi Suci sendiri hanya bersifat simbolis.Namun Kaisar yang berasal
dari Dinasti Habsburg,memimpin sebuah wilayah yang cukup besar yaitu Archduchy of Austria yang terdiri atas wilayah Hungaria dan Bohemia.Austria pada waktu itu
menjadi salah satu negara kuat di Eropa,yang memiliki 8 juta penduduk.selain Austria,Kekaisaran Romawi Suci
memiliki wilayah-wilayah lain yang kuat seperti Bavaria,Saxony,Brandenburg,Palatinate,Hesse,dan keuskupan Trier dan Nuremberg (masing-masing negara memiliki
penduduk antara 500.oo hingga 1 juta jiwa.Negara kecil yang merdeka,kota-kota bebas,dan biara-biara juga tersebar di seluruh kekaisaran.
Tensi konlik agama semakin menguat sekitar pertengahan abad ke 16.Perjanjian Augsburg mulai dilanggar,seperti beberapa uskup yang pindah agama menolak
wilayahnya untuk diserahkan.Selain itu Wangsa Habsburg dan beberapa penguasa Katolik di Kekaisaran Romawi Suci dan Spanyol ingin mengembalikan lagi kekuasan
mereka di wilayahnya setelah kekalahan mereka dalam perang kemerdekaan Belanda.Dan mencapai puncaknya pada perang Cologne (1583-1588).Konflik dimulai
ketika seorang pangeran-uskup kota Cologne,Gerhard truckles Von Wald-Burg
pindah ke ajaran Calvinism.Karena dia sebagai seorang pemilih Kerajaan (di kekaisaran Romawi Suci,para pemimpin setiap wilayah memilih putra mahkota sebagai
penerus tahta) maka dia menghasilkan kekuasaan yang lebih besar kepada kaum Protestan di badan pemilih Kaisar Romawi Suci.(umumnya kaum Katolik lebih
mendominasi dalam badan ini).