lOMoARcPSD|4978837

Constructivism - Lecture notes 7

World Politics (The University of Warwick)

A StuDocu não é patrocinada ou endossada por nenhuma faculdade ou universidade

Constructivism
A critical, post-positivist approach to IR formed from both neo-realism and neo-liberal
institutionalism.
- From neo-realism because: It denies that ideas and norms can trump interests.
Richard Ashley: “Neo-realism is so committed to materialism that it constructs fake views
of society devoid of ideas, beliefs and rules”.
- From neo-liberal institutionalism because: It recognises that states may construct norms
and institutions to regulate their behaviour.
Constructivism is also formed from sociological theory and critical theory:
- Sociological theory because: It argues that structures we construct can constrain state
interests and identities.
Alexander Wendt: “Structures do more than constrain, they construct and create identities
and interests”.
Immanuel Wallerstein: “Capitalism effectively does just this”.
- Critical theory because: It acknowledges the power behind seemingly value-neutral
concepts such as sovereignty.

It simply argues that there is no objective social-political reality in global politics independent of our
understanding: we have formed assumptions and our own realities and act according to these.
These realities affect how we see ourselves and how we understand and respond to certain
issues.
- We are shaped by culture: An Arab state is an Arab state because the rules of Arabism
have shaped identity, interests and state policies.
- Max Weber: Culture shaped the meanings and significance that actors gave to their
actions. Society creates this, not individuals.

Nations are defined by its members and their traditions, values, opinions, realities. State behaviour
therefore isn’t determined by the international structure (neo-realism), but by how it perceives
reality and threats.
Alexander Wendt: “Anarchy is what states make of it”.
Any notion of a state, alliance, anarchy, institution is a social construct. There is nothing natural
about any of those things, therefore they must have been constructed. Only when these things are
given meanings by humans, will they become socially accepted and become part of the process of
socialisation. Ideas and constructs have the powerful capacity to enable and constrain our and
state actions.
- Money, refugees, terrorists, human rights, sovereignty all exist because of human
agreement they do: norms.
- F. Kratochwil notes that the military capacities of the USSR at the end of the Cold War are
the same as Russia today: constructed danger.

The state’s goal is still survival, like in the other mainstream theories.

Mainstream Constructivism

This branch seeks to refine the realist and liberal framework of the world. We are examining the
world without focusing on the ‘bigger picture’ and failing to find ultimate truths. Seeks to answer
questions such as: what ended the Cold War?

Alexander Wendt’s theory

The cause of war isn’t due to the structural causes of anarchy or human nature, rather state
identities and interests are a combination of social constructs and collective meanings.

Baixado por andiashdas asdadooa (abestadohtml2@[Link])

The collective interests and identities of a state’s population influence how the state may behave.
Therefore, anarchy has no inherent property of its own, it is based on different cultural
assumptions and on different states’ beliefs and interactions.
Alexander Wendt: “Anarchy is what the state makes of it”.

Constructivism has a commitment to idealism and holism.

Constructivists believe that the state can choose whether to cooperate or compete. This illustrates
the fluidity of the theory.

Wendt’s Compromise:
- Anarchy is simply a myth. Constructivism seeks to free us from anarchy and build a bridge
to accommodate for both neo-realist and neo-liberal thought. It accepts that states are the
author of anarchy whether through cooperation or conflict.
- However: It tells us who the decision maker is on the face of it all, but fails to tell us who the
REAL decision maker is: sells out constructivist ideas: states are constructed.

Both neo-realism and neo-liberalism emphasised the structure of the world and crucially
emphasised the idea of a state and anarchy: both of which have no reality and objective truth.
The world is built and develops through social relations. However, IR is carried out through
structures, which are socially constructed: do we need these structures for IR to truly begin?

Decontestation, identities and norms

States crave legitimacy and therefore act according to the values for the broader international
community by complying with norms. This will make cooperation easier. States wont actively seek
enemies by going against the norm, but may start off by naming themselves something positive:
the ‘Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’, ‘People’s Republic of China’.

Social interactions lead to social norms and consensus telling us how to behave and how to think.
We only agree the US exists because we believe it does and agree it does. Constructivism studies
the norms and illustrates how they change our lives and IR.
John Ruggie: Constructivism emphasises human consciousness in international life”.

Anthony Giddens: International norms can also shape the identities and interests of states.
These norms can be reproduced.
- Identities are important in explaining the existence of alliances: NATO, the UN, EU.
Identities can be reproduced: EU accession criteria.
- Identities can lead to friendships or rivalries. This can change the idea of anarchy.
- Overall, identities are fixed as a core decision maker: the citizens provide identities which
are gained through situated activity.

Peter Katzenstein: “Identity and norms shape state interests and must be incorporated to
generate explanations for actions”.

Freidrich Kratochwil: Regulative rules regulate existing norms. Constitutive rules create the
possibility for these norms. Without knowing the meanings of these rules and norms from the
viewpoint of a citizen we will never understand the world.

Baixado por andiashdas asdadooa (abestadohtml2@[Link])

Actors may seek to change norms and guide state identities and interests: these may include
human rights activists, anti-racism groups, parties with a mainstream and liberal agenda.

Criticisms of Mainstream Constructivism

- Wendt overcomes the problem of international anarchy by asserting the state as an actor.
- Emphasis on the state by reifying it as a decision-maker: aren’t states socially constructed?
Who produces them how do they become decision-makers?
- Wendt overly simplifies: How do identities form? How do states believe something in the
first place?
- It ignores material state aspects: the economy, military.
- Mainstream theories are still much more popular and widely accepted and offering a better
explanation to world politics.

Critical Constructivism

This branch argues that we cannot examine the world which also removing yourself from it. We
will always examine subjectively.
What is understood as ‘reality’ is socially constructed on a daily basis. Constructions of reality
reflect and can determine power relations.
The issue is: which actors or groups are powerful enough to produce and reproduce reality and
common-sense truths? In whose interests are these being made?
- Constructivists need to denaturalise dominant constructions about the world. This will allow
for underlying truths and power structures to be revealed.
- ‘Construction sites’ of the media, culture, society must be investigated.
- We miss a fundamental reality if these assumptions aren’t challenged. If these are
investigated, change may occur in which alternative, fairer conclusions can be realised.
National interest: Jutta Weldes argues that the idea is a dangerous construct with the threats
created and perceived. They are created as meaningful concepts from culture.
National interest is created by state officials/elites who look at situations and problems in a
‘constructed’ way based off their assumptions.

Threats: are social constructions, assumptions and explanations. Who/what is the threat, who is
the threatened, why are they a threat, how do we address this threat? Realism objectively deals
with it, accepting assumptions with no base and pursue an aggressive policy.

Nations: The idea of a nation has been invented by nationalists through the use of symbols and
culture/language. Benedict Anderson argues that the “nation is an imagined political community,
imagined as both natural and limited”. The idea of boundaries and community/fraternity towards
fellow citizens are political and exclusive. This can justify horrific acts and is dangerous.
Benedict Anderson: “A nation is imagined because members of it will never know or meet or
hear of most fellow members, yet in their minds they live in one communion”.

Criticisms of Critical Constructivism

- This strand lacks a defined theory: it doesn’t tell us why some people have an interest in a
certain area, or why they socially construct things. More of an approach than explanatory
theory.
- Critical constructivism tells us little about what is WRONG with the world, just explains it.
- Deconstructs the world too much leaving us little in reality to work with: not a programme for
action, one for simple thought.
- Talcott Parson: Society, NOT actors create beliefs and ideas.

Baixado por andiashdas asdadooa (abestadohtml2@[Link])