International affairs have been the nemesis of Liberalism. The essence of Liberalism is self-restraint, moderation, compromise and peace whereas the essence of international politics is exactly the opposite: troubled peace, at best, or the state of war. Discuss.
To be answer this question effectively it is paramount to know the clear differences between Liberalism and Realism. And also each theory can theoretically work in the international political system, and how each one effects or not effect us.
Realism and liberalism are the two central paradigms in International Relations. They have differing ideas when it comes to explaining how states associate themselves and with each other in the absence of a world government. The realist ideology looks to give emphasis to the conservation of the nation state by seeing that sovereign dominance is a compulsory for its survival, where in contrast the Liberal doctrine emphasises state support and common interests so that a greater good can be achieved together than by states acting purely out of national interests.
Realism is the theory that nation states are pawns in an international system that is in actual fact anarchic. This basically means the dismissal of the independent influence of international organizations, instate, or outer state institutions such as the United Nations or OECD. Also the focus on the primary importance of nationalism, as opposed to state groupings, or international ones, states thusly are only looking out for their own self-interests, through the paradigms of military, economic and political means. Realism believes that all states are sovereign bodies and have the profound natural right to run their own affairs. Every nation however are rational entities that can make balanced judgements to itself and its inhabitants. A states prevailing national interest is its own national security and thusly its survival.
The theory puts forward the idea that there is a continuous power struggle...