CHAPTER 5 – THE REALIST CRITIQUE
ð The realist thought begins way after the utopian one, even thought he points to scarce claims to this in the Greek Helenic world dominated by utopian mainstream.
ð Machiavelli was the first important political realist, who stood against the utopian mainstream so far.
o Theory does not create the practice, as the utopians thought, but it’s the opposite.
o Machiavelli recognized the importance of moral but thought that any moral could exist without authority.
§ Moral is a product of power.
ð Believes that modern realism is more progressive than utopian thought, because it is not bound to stagnated ideas to be pursued.
ð Realist modern thought developed by the “Historical School”, mainly in German, with Hegel and Marx.
o They decreased the pessimist feature of realism, raised by Hobbes and Machiavelli, however, highlighted the determinist aspect of realism.
o Hegel è Zeitgeist
o Marx è less determinist, believed in “tendencies flowing from a necessity to an unavoidable goal”
§ Marx didn’t seem to sustain that the proletariats victory was fair, but only in the sense that it was historically inevitable.
ð Modern realism is praised for stating that the thought is relatively and pragmatically.
o Opinions are outputs of different moments and realities involving one interests.
§ Shows this fact by the divergence between Wilson and Briand, since the first said the law is more precious than the peace.
§ Also shows the relativity of values highlighting Wilson’s radical change regarding the war after 1917, when he engaged.
§ Remembers the moral criticism of the western countries when first faced by the submarines, which they didn’t have.
o Theories don’t shape the facts course, but, instead, are invented to explain (justify) them. Exs:
§ Empire before the Imperialism.
§ 18th Century British society before the laissez faire
§ One country socialism to explain the failure of a broad international Sovietic regime.
ð For having no such thing as a universal pattern, and for everything is relative, one should not perceive the national interest as an objective and absolute goal.
o National interest is always associated with ideas of universal benefit.
o Theories of social morality are always a product of a dominant group which forces a comprehension of their interests as if they were from the hole society.
§ E.g. Theory of the harmony of interests.
· Compares the harmony of interest with pax Romano and pax Britannica, which are well know coverages for imperialist practices.
ð Morality is a consequence of power
ð All propaganda against the war is itself a way of war propaganda, because attacks the enemy, raising hate feelings (Halévy)
ð Any kind of internationalism, whether called cosmopolitanism, etc… is just another case of morality created by the power satisfied with this arrangement.
CHAPTER 6 – LIMITATIONS OF REALISM
ð Despite its logical preponderance, realism don’t give us clear sources of action needed even to the procedure of its thoughts.
ð In real politics, the belief in the rigidity of facts usually reflects a lack of will or interest in changing the facts.
ð Realism excludes four necessary things for every good political action:
o A finite objective
§ Treitschke points out that the terrible thing about Machiavelli was not his methods, but the complete lack of purpose of the state, which just existed to exist.
§ The finite objective, assuming an apocalyptic view, attracts people throw emotional and irrational appeals.
o An emotional appeal
o A right to moral judgment
o A field of action
No comments:
Post a Comment