Siatriz, Ma. Kristine Bernadette L.

Bachelor of Arts in Political Science IIII-B

Introduction to International Relations

Different Philosophers’ Views on Realism

THUCYDIDES
Thucydides, taking up the issue of anarchy within the international system, very much
agrees with the realist point of view, stating that in a system where there is no
overarching authority, the only way to maintain order is through the form of balance of
power, which takes the form of the strong exercising their power over the weak.
Thucydides mostly shares the negative view of human nature as he sees “fear, the
desire for glory, and the pursuit of self-interest” as universal human characteristics, thus
implying that behavior is uniform and predictable. He discusses war and conflict at
length in his History of the Peloponnesian War and comes to the conclusion that “what
made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused
in Sparta.” He has identified one of the main reasons of war: fear. For him, war is an
inevitable feature of the international system with the balance of power as the only
means to achieve peace. The growth of power in Athens caused the Spartans to feel
more insecure and they started to prepare to defend themselves. In a realist point of
view, it argues that without the balance of power there can be no peace and shows how
easily the balance can be disrupted and cause a war. Moreover, he viewed the security
of state as essential in nature. It needs to protect from both internal and external
enemies. Thucydides stated that the powerful state can easily manipulate the behavior
of the weaker state. To be a powerful state, it needs to increase internal capabilities,
gaining economic powers to enter into alliances with countries of homogenous interests.
He emphasized state or military security threats and ignored the other aspects or
dimensions of security.
THOMAS HOBBES
Hobbes stems his theory about the State of Nature, he asserts that without a world
government, the system is subject to a state of anarchy and of a war as is of every man
against every man. Hobbes opposes the view that under such conditions it is the strong
who determine the order of the international system. According to his theory of the
State of Nature, every man is equal and thus the weakest has strength enough to kill,
the strongest, either by secret machination or by confederacy with others that are in the
same danger with himself. The order is rather maintained by a general rule of reasons
with is that, “every man ought to endeavour peace and man have a strong and constant
desire for peace and thus, they will always use their power to obtain future apparent
good.” He also claims that peace and security in an international system without an
overarching authority can only be achieved through cooperation between states and
individuals. Hobbes states that the primary objective of every man is to seek peace and
follow it. He does not see war as a necessary means in a world of anarchy but rather
that if every man adheres to this law, there will be no need for war, as rational
sovereigns will not act in an unnecessary aggressive manner. However, in his
Leviathan he describes circumstances under which war may be justified when there is
no other way to achieve one’s ultimate goal.
NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI
According to Machiavelli, “man must either be caressed or extinguished”—a definition of
realism as an approach to politics rooted in a cynical view of human motives and
possibilities, and devoted to advancing the interests of a state without regard for moral
or religious structures. For Machiavelli, the effective truth of human things cannot be
understood simply in terms of material wants or needs, of acquisition or security. He
understood that the political and military realities of the world had been decisively
affected by the victory of Christianity over paganism. Machiavelli noted that Men's
natural desire to acquire must be respected as the premise of all political action. This
desire cannot and should not be repressed. But it must be regulated so as to promote
the common good. Such regulation is to be achieved not through moral exhortation
but through political institutions with teeth--that is, institutions that both provide
ordinary checks and balances to control contending social interests, and at the same
time facilitate the application of extraordinary measures when necessary to surmount
domestic or external crises." Neither communism nor National Socialism accords the
least deference to the essential trait of human nature: what Machiavelli calls "the very
natural and ordinary" desire to acquire. The totalitarian attempt to reconstitute man
leads inevitably to the boundless extremes of "pious cruelty", quite unlike the cruelties
"well used" recommended by Machiavelli. Moreover, he gives guideline to ruler to be
watchful regarding the possible threats to his private security and the security of the
state. He also encouraged the exercise of alliances with states of same interest and a
range of offensive and defensive strategies to defend state.