Ethics and Emotions Challenge Realism's Dominance in World Politics

The academic discipline of International Relations (IR) emerged in its modern form after the Second World War, shaped overwhelmingly by Western — and particularly American — intellectual traditions. Scholar Stanley Hoffman famously described IR as 'an American Social Science', reflecting how the discipline's foundational assumptions, institutions, and research agendas were constructed largely within the United States. The modern international order itself was designed when European powers dominated global affairs, leaving the Global South with minimal agency in crafting the norms, rules, and institutions — such as the United Nations Charter, the Bretton Woods system, and the WTO — that continue to govern world politics today.

The dominant theoretical framework that emerged from this tradition was Realism, systematised by Hans Morgenthau in his landmark work Politics Among Nations (1948). Realism posits that the international system is fundamentally anarchic — there is no overarching authority above sovereign states — and that states are therefore compelled to prioritise their national interest, defined primarily in terms of power. While Morgenthau's classical realism was philosophically nuanced and acknowledged a role for morality, its popular reception reduced it to two core ideas: anarchy and national interest. Over decades, this simplified Realist vocabulary migrated from academic classrooms to television studios and foreign policy commentary, becoming the default lens through which diplomatic events are interpreted.

Yet IR theory has never been monolithic. Liberalism challenged Realism by emphasising international institutions, economic interdependence, and democratic peace. Constructivism, associated with scholars like Alexander Wendt, argued that international structures are socially constructed — that identities, norms, and ideas shape state behaviour as much as material power does. Post-colonial IR theory and feminist IR further questioned whose interests and whose experiences the dominant frameworks actually represent.