Idealism vs. Realism

Idealism vs. Realism

For decades, intellectuals have used idealism and realism in differing or opposite senses in philosophical history. On one hand, realism considers the implications of inherent power factors in human society. On the other hand, idealism shaped how the West viewed world politics and international relations. Considering this, there is a need to employ both terms with great caution. A shift from idealism to realism occurred after the Second World War, as Europe and Japan emerged from the political ruins.

Idealism

In foreign policy, idealism maintains that a state has a responsibility to convert its international political philosophy into a foreign policy. In the United States, history credits President Woodrow Wilson as the first advocate of idealism. Particular, he emphasized on American exceptionalism ideal. Roskin & Berry (2010) are convinced that progress is fundamental in solving global issues such as poverty and inequality. People understood that the existing international relations led to World War I could be transformed into a more just and peaceful world order.

The transformation from idealism to realism was clear in the development of League of Nations, spread of enlightenment, and the adoption of peaceful policies towards other countries. The responsibility of philosophical scholars was to contribute to the progress to overcome ill-will, prejudices, and sinister interests of some state officials and citizens.

Realism

Theoretically, realism formalizes the realpolitik statesmanship of Europe before the Second World War. As a school of thought, it is anchored on the leaders’ pursuit of power and global dominance. Roskin and Berry (2010) observe that this theory revolves around numerous propositions as opposed to idealism. First, realism is a spectrum of ideas because the states form a central pillar in international politics rather than multinationals or individuals. Second, a supranational authority that implements rules over the states does not exist because its international system of politics is anarchic. Third, the maximization of self-interests is attainable though the actors’ rationality in the international political system. Lastly, all states desire power to guarantee self-preservation.

The transition from idealism to realism was due to the expansion of industrial production and unprecedented improvements in scientific knowledge. Realism explains manifestations of philosophical realism. It clarifies that the reality is independent of observer’s conclusions, be it in science, arts, or philosophy, hence a sharp contrast with idealism.

References

Roskin, M., & Berry, N. (2010). IR: The New World of International Relations. San Francisco, CA: Longman/Pearson Education.