I’m starting to study international relations right now at the college I am going to. International relations happens to be one of my majors. I am taking two classes: Approaches to International Relations, and I’m taking National Security and the Changing world. And I believe that I am becoming more and more of an anarchist as I take this class. The topic title just focuses on one aspect that I just wanted to talk about, but, there is another myth that I wanted to discuss.
The first myth about states being rational actors is what really pushed me over the edge. I know that I am a very fluctuating person… like I’ve been with many places on the spectrum before. I don’t like to label myself… and I don’t personally consider myself an anarchist, necessarily. That’s just the spectrum where I am now.
But back to the topic, I can’t honestly see how states are seen as rational actors. I am more inclined to agree with the realist approach that states just do whatever they feel is necessary to promote their national interest and they often tend to ignore morality. I agree with the liberal approach in that Democratic states tend not to go to war with each other and if there were more free markets and more free trade than we would have more interdependence with one another and the international system would be more at peace.
All of the dominant schools of thought, I guess except for the radical school of thought, tends to look at states as rational actors. As if these states were people who were capable of making decisions. I honestly can’t put a finger about how much this drives me mad to no end. States certainly call themselves rational actors. But are they really? One quick look at our domestic policy and we’d see a corporate state that oppresses its own people and a government that has no respect for its constitutional rights. One quick looks at our foreign policy would reveal a nation that is hungry for oil and raw materials and one that often back tracks on its belief in free-markets, in supporting the propping of authoritarian regimes around the world.
Other states wish to promote their own ideology or they wish to promote like peace, or, they may promote whatever they wish to promote. They enter in alliances with other nations and they have wars. These states have wars over ethnic conflicts, and they have wars over energy. How can states be considered rational when one looks at how childish they act with one another in order to just survive? States take Hobbe’s too literally while ignoring the fact that their rivals are human too. In other words, I don’t believe that states are rational actors. At least, not among those that they consider rivals.
The second thing that pushed me over the edge is how states are considered rational actors but they don’t view NGOs in the same light. How can people think of the Soviet Union as a legitimate body politics while not thinking of the PLO, Hammas, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, or other groups that wish to pursue a similar oppressive ideology as not one? It’s not as if states have a monopoly over legitimacy. If states try to spread a war of aggression against other nations that’s considered legitimate. But when a private organization does it? They suddenly become irrational actors. I say both states and NGOs that have those ideological aims and pursue them through violence are both irrational.
I’ve also been learning about in the class that I’m taking in National Security how people believe that we must pursue our national interest with the threat of force. That’s the narrow view of national security of course. My professor doesn’t necessarily believe that we should always use force (I have the same professor for both classes), but, like this is what a lot of people believe in! They don’t think we should use diplomacy or soft power. They ignore that and they just want to go right to the military or economic power.
These things have been pushing me over the edge. First of all, I would like to ask if anyone has an answer to my first question. And has anyone else had a similar experience or enlightenment? I just think all of these myths about states are nuts. I can’t believe how many people keep repeating them as if they were the epitome of truth. People talk about the need for bi-partisanship in our foreign policy, but, that would only screw us over even more.
