Intro to IR theory

Joining another state to deal with a threat

Relying on another state to deal with a threat

Directly matching capabilities with a threat

A bad strategy to deal with another threat by not conserving resources

Temporary form of external balancing against a threat

Forming a relationship with a growing power to neutralize it

Relying on other states to deal with your threat

Happens when your future ally can pose a threat to you

Because this power may be a threat to you

To conserve resources to preserve relative gains

Because this power may be a threat to others but not to you

It's generally a legitimate strategy of external balancing for a wide array of reasons

Alliances are for sissy liberals

You hurt your new ally's relative gains

This power may/will turn against you after you aid them

Good balancing

Misunderstandings

Bad balancing

Concern over absolute gains, not relative gains

Issue of human nature which leads to desire for power & relative gains

Domestic Politics which drive foreign policy which drives IR

Desire for security & PooM which leads to desire for power & relative gains

Structures & individual people who form ideas about IR

Domestic institutions

Historic institutions

Business & corporations

Lobbyists

The democratic peace forms from liberal democracies being unable to justify war with other liberal democracies

The democratic peace forms from war being extremely unprofitable long term

International Trade promotes itself through a virtuous cycle making technology cheaper and war less profitable

The Golden Straight Jacket prevents war because of implications of the electronic herd

Anocracies have warlike tendencies as war is still profitable for them due to weak institutions & trade

Democracies are not warlike because of the power of international trade

Democracies are not warlike because of strong institutions & inability to justify war with other democracies

Anocracies are warlike to mobilize political support & because they lack strong institutions

International trade builds democracy which builds international law which builds international trade

Cooperation leads to better outcomes than competition

The Golden straight jacket promotes international trade while making war more economically risky

International trade creates technological progress to make international trade better in a cycle that results in war's unprofitability

The GSJ and EH cause war to always be unprofitable

The Golden Straight Jacket is a set of pro capitalist and stable government policies to attract the electronic herd's investments

Liberal democracies find it politically impossible to justify war against other liberal democracies, because they find themselves more trustworthy

Anocracies are more warlike to mobilize political support due to weak institutions

Humans thirst for power is best achieved by working together towards common goals

The normative structures in place around the world encourage cooperation between agents

Humans are social animals that desire freedom and wellbeing

We don't truly know as the nature of IR ignores crucial case studies of unrepresented groups to promote previously held beliefs.

A liberal who prefers international institutions over domestic

A liberal who explicitly likes international institutions

A liberal who likes to study power dynamics

A liberal who exclusively focuses on international institutions

Materialism

Cooperation

Ideas

Questioning

Collectively held ideas, ie: aggression or xenophobia

Lack of trust, ie: X believes Y has it out for them

None of the above because our analysis is materialist and flawed

Improper balancing; ie: easy opportunity for aggression

The collectively held idea that war is bad

Killing Ayatollah Khamenei

All of the above

Ideologies that encourage cooperation & diplomacy

Information Transmission; ie: protesting

Symbolic Politics; ie: categorizing nukes as WMDs

Leverage Politics; ie: Calls by JFK & Kruschev to limit nuclear production

Accountability Politics; ie: Non nuclear proliferation treaties

These are all part of Normative Structure Change

These examples are all wrong for normative structure change

Challenge every assertion

Question every belief

Prioritize every marginalized group

Understand every perspective

Our national interest is simple and one layered

His focus on power and domination is mostly right

Your understanding of power is overly narrow & ignores empowerment

Violators of human rights are not shunned and can gain power

Liberals are too ideational and may be wrong about everything

The male perspective ignores most of the truth

Our national interest is complex and multi layered

Canada is a powerful country despite US domination as power is different for everyone

The personal is political & the political is personal

Women are less aggressive and warlike and are more likely to cooperate

Female disempowerment in marriages result in lower development

Not funding women's healthcare has led to a gender gap which has led to trafficking which has led to Boko Harem

Importance of collectively held ideas

PFS - the correlation between women's rights and development

The race critique

Case selection is affected by bias

Realists believe this focus on men by scholars is because men are in power and dominate IR

Liberals believe cooperation between men and women would lead to better IR

Constructivists thinking feminism is a type of constructivism since it's about ideas

Race theorists adopting feminism's critiques and applying it to race

Our analysis of case studies is focused on white males

International relations did not emerge from studying & justifying colonialism

Social cause & effect is not based on a neutral norm

Constructivism

Race & bias are normative structures

Power dynamics influence throughout history

The importance of cooperation and peace

Capitalist competition results in wealth accumulation by elites

We can't know

Ideas

We don't know yet

Mistrust

The struggle for power

The struggle to satisfy material needs

The struggle to dominate

The struggle to avoid social conflict

Zbogo

Enloe

Locken

They all are

We know nothing without reexamining and looking at every perspective

Their case studies ignore non white histories and are often plain wrong; ie: protestant work ethic, democratic peace (ignoring colonial victims)

The white perspective ignores most of the truth