Pink, it's the new Purple

Someone in class on Thursday made the comment that liberalism is the new realism. This argument was supported by the fact that in liberalism states are much more focused on their own well being and not so concerned with how other states are doing. This seems like it should be realist because the state is solely focused on its self and not anyone else. That sounds realist doesn’t it? No. Saying that in realism the state is only concerned with itself is selling realism short. Realism does not purport to say that states are only concerned with themselves. In realism states are constantly worried about other states. This is because the major concern in realism is security. Understanding security requires one to look outside of the borders of his or her own state and analyze other states. Realism is very much focused on other states because that is where threats to survival will come from. Just look at some of the basic tenements of realism, balance of power, deterrence, zero-sum game, all of these only work if states are concerned about more than just themselves. In a realist world states are continuously trying to figure out what their neighbors are doing and how they can stop them from gaining power relative to the home state. This brings me to another central point of realism, relative gains. Realism is concerned with relative, not absolute gains. In realism the only power that matters is how much more or less you have relative to other states. It doesn’t do you any good to gain power if everyone else gains more. This is because if other states are gaining more power than you this will increase their ability to thrust their will upon you. Power only works if you gain it at the expense of another. Thus the measure of a state is wholly focused on the ratio of power between two states. Thus realism is outwardly looking.

Once again in realism the state is not concerned with only itself, it is also very concerned with all the other states.

Matt Bank