Imperialism

something interesting i thought i'd throw into the discussion:

last year at uni i did a class on warm terrorism and conflict.

as it was an international relations field, it dealt with different types of IR theory such as realism, liberalism, marxism, post-modernism etc...

I'm doing a full I.R. class now which goes into the theories in alot more depth than the war class.

one of my friends who was in my class last year is now studying in north carolina doing pretty much the same module but says all they get taught is realist theory with vague passing comments about other theories.

without going too much into it, realist theory is based around the state being the most important actor in I.R., it's there to promote the national and world interest(which tends to mean the white, christian, western, male interest) and is usually an aggresive theory because at it's very basics it says: war is going to happen so we might as well let it happen.

I just find it kind of interesting that this is supposed to be one of the best universities outside the ivy league to study politics yet it's so narrow with regards to its taught curriculum which isn't surprising considering the USA is currently the archetypal realist power.

And even then, there's "letting it happen" and "making it happen".

But it's a brilliant marketing move to call that theory "Realist", as that alone implies all other theories are either irrelevant or utopist.


Ponrauil

yeah well that's the crux of it, they say we describe how the world is hence we're right.

which on face value is true in that yes there is war between states etc... but is it unavoidable so we should just take a laissez faire approach and let it happen?

i don't necesarilly think so.

and again, the problem is that this is only the ideals of predominentaly western, white, males. im not particularly sure buddhist nations would follow the same ideals....

Depends on what ideals you're talking about. If it's the ideals of the average citizen probably not. But if it's on a national level, I'd say it's pretty close. Every nation that has had the opportunity in history to expand itself and influence bordering regions or the other side of the world always did it.
The issue is more the means used to reach them than the ideals themselves.

Ponrauil