Review of Waltz Man the State and War

• Dwelling house
• My Books

Open up Preview

See a Trouble?

Nosotros'd love your help. Allow us know what's wrong with this preview of Man, the State, and State of war by Kenneth N. Flit.

Thank you for telling us about the problem.

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this volume, please sign up.

Community Reviews

 · 1,724 ratings  · 87 reviews

Kickoff your review of Human being, the Land, and War: A Theoretical Analysis

This book has legs! I read it start in graduate school in 1969. I was impressed with the argument and then, and withal capeesh its power now. He identifies a key problem as (page 12) "identifying and achieving the conditions of peace. . ." He notes that, over time, three separate views take dominated discourse on the causes of war (and how to accomplish peace): (a) human nature is the root crusade; (b) the construction of states is the key factor; (c) the international organization itself is the major variable. This volume has legs! I read it first in graduate school in 1969. I was impressed with the argument then, and nonetheless appreciate its ability now. He identifies a primal problem every bit (folio 12) "identifying and achieving the conditions of peace. . ." He notes that, over time, three separate views have dominated soapbox on the causes of war (and how to accomplish peace): (a) human nature is the root cause; (b) the construction of states is the key factor; (c) the international system itself is the major variable.

The book proceeds in a linear fashion. Starting time, he examines the variety of arguments locating the cause of state of war in human nature. Yet, he also notes that to link human nature to state of war is not easily done (in that location is, of course, much debate over exactly what human nature is--or even if at that place is such a given nature), and that political matters must be taken into account. Every bit he considers the contributions of the behavioral sciences, he notes that (page 79) "The more than fully behavioral scientists take account of politics, the more than sensible and the more small-scale their efforts to contribute to peace become."

The second level of analysis is the structure of states themselves. He notes that some have argued that if the country had a proper structure, then peace would result. He considers, for instance, liberal theorists of the 19th century who made that point. Ane trouble: While trying to create more liberal states, what about those illiberal ones who may engage in conflict? What then? The construction of the state won't forbid self-defence force. Indeed, some liberals, like Thomas Paine, wanted to use forcefulness to democratize the world.

The last level of assay is the structure of the international system itself. The main point here is that that system can be termed "anarchy." There is no primal strength to prevent outbreaks of violence. Then, violence will occur. Interestingly, he begins the chapter on international anarchy with a quotation from Cicero (page 159) "For what tin be done confronting forcefulness without strength." States demand to protect themselves when at that place is no mechanism to maintain peace; they will act in their national involvement when threatened. The end result is the possibility of state of war whenever a state might be threatened. In Waltz' words (folio 227): "Co-ordinate to the third paradigm, there is a constant possibility of war in a earth in which in that location are ii or more states each seeking to promote a set of interests and having no bureau upon which they can rely for protection."

In short, all 3 levels (images) must be understood. None is irrelevant. But the key to understanding state of war is the state of international anarchy. The book holds up well over time. It however presents a useful bulletin, albeit from the hard-nosed realist position. Neocons won't similar the argument that changing the structure of states won't make a lot of difference every bit long every bit there is international anarchy. Anyway, for those interested in a fairly difficult-headed analysis, this volume still serves a useful purpose.

...more

Oct 05, 2013 Raj Agrawal rated it really liked it

[This is a snapshot of my thoughts on this book after just finishing it. This is non meant to serve as a summary or a critique – just as some words on how I engaged with this volume for the purposes of building a theoretical framework on strategy. I will probable have missed or misinterpreted some important points, and then delight forgive me in advance.]
In Man the State and War, Waltz provides iii interrelated "images" through which the causes of war derive: "And so primal are man, the land, and the s [This is a snapshot of my thoughts on this volume after simply finishing information technology. This is not meant to serve as a summary or a critique – only equally some words on how I engaged with this book for the purposes of edifice a theoretical framework on strategy. I will likely have missed or misinterpreted some important points, so please forgive me in advance.]
In Man the State and War, Waltz provides three interrelated "images" through which the causes of war derive: "So fundamental are man, the state, and the state organisation in any attempt to understand international relations that seldom does an annotator, however wedded to one prototype, entirely overlook the other two" (160). He provides a adequately comprehensive literature review that incorporates philosophy, theology, and anthropology to assistance identify the prevailing views on human nature, the "badness" and "goodness" of men and the organization of men, and the interrelationship betwixt organizations. He concludes that his realist frame provides the advisable impetus to incorporate theory and politics toward the state'south ultimate moral responsibility, that being its accumulation of ability via the use of forcefulness for the purpose of long-term viability: "A foreign policy based on this paradigm of international relations is neither moral nor immoral, but embodies merely a reasoned response to the world nearly usa" (238).
On human nature, Flit argues "If human nature is merely one of the causes of war, and so, even on the supposition that man nature is fixed, we can properly comport on a search for the conditions of peace" (30). I disagree with this premise, besides as Flit's oversimplification of Augustine's theories on the nature of man. If human being is indeed tuned to seek out his own gain, and this cannot be corrected, and so I contend that this provides an opportunity to anticipate behavior for the purposes of shaping it. I do non believe human'due south human being nature can be corrected, nor do I believe this is the sole solution to state of war; however, I practice believe Waltz's premise on his first image is incomplete. The "security dilemma" (37) is a constant existence for each private, and then is projected upon the second image as men organize into governed states. If this first image is fabricated more complete, I believe it would let for the influence of non-state actors into Waltz'south theory – I recognize this is fundamentally not a part of the realist frame.
I see the second frame, the state, as similar to Kuhn'due south image or Allison & Zelikow's Model I (Rational Thespian Model) – states are predictable and are based on a unique perspective of itself. Waltz devotes the majority of his defence of the second image on countering liberalism instead of building a definition of the state. I run into this as a metaphor for how states may be formed in the first identify – non then much near what the shared values or objectives among men may exist, but how they differ from other states' values and/or objectives. The major consequence I see with the second image is the prevalence of civil war and strife with non-state actors. The influence of international and social media now has a unique touch on on international politics that I tend to believe is the external policing strength that liberalism requires; even so, that force is non strong enough to provide a balancing machinery that prevents force-on-force conflict.
The third image is closely related to the 2d, in that the human relationship betwixt states is another source of war. Equally "the actions of states, or more accurately, of men acting for states, make up the substance of international relations" (122 – describes the 2d image), states can align, contest, or await for opportunity in an effort to acquire power. This image projects the dangerous assumption that all states have this same perspective, and therefore can be the cause of war itself. Another potential source of disharmonize betwixt the 2d and tertiary images is that in society to solidify the image of the state, a state may crave not simply a unifying set of principles, and a need to vilify another state'southward principles. This vilification was demonstrated between the US and USSR throughout the Cold War. Thucydides (fright, accolade, involvement) and Allison & Zelikow (Rational Player, organizational outputs, and private leaders) provide more than perspective on the potential causes of war while still fitting neatly within Flit'southward realist perspective.
Flit'southward solution to war is force. This makes fiddling sense to me; however, based on his statement, he believes it is the only pick. Devote plenty resources to exist able to apply force as necessary to achieve the necessary amount of power to alive in relative peace. When that peace is threatened, we need to have the adequacy to deliver forcefulness in such a style so every bit to eliminate the threat and preserve power. I believe that today, by projecting force to preserve power, we finish up losing it. In a commonwealth, strategic power is dependent on public opinion, and public opinion is sensitive to what may exist perceived equally an immoral projection of forcefulness. The electric current administration has not necessarily paid the same political price as previous ones in this regard; perhaps because this assistants understands how political uppercase is fungible. But that is some other topic for another 24-hour interval.
...more

Dec 31, 2007 André rated it it was ok

If you are a pupil of International Relations, the reputation of this book should precede it. I personally picked it up and read it for pleasure afterwards it kept existence mentioned in my university courses. Let'south but say that although I picked information technology upwardly for pleasure, I got very little pleasureful reading from information technology. This is a very dry out slice of academic work; some academics have a gift for making their writing engaging, but Waltz does not. He is fairly accessible and I call up everyone interested in politics If you lot are a educatee of International Relations, the reputation of this book should precede it. I personally picked it upwardly and read it for pleasure after it kept being mentioned in my academy courses. Allow's just say that although I picked information technology up for pleasure, I got very lilliputian pleasureful reading from it. This is a very dry out piece of academic piece of work; some academics have a gift for making their writing engaging, just Flit does non. He is adequately attainable and I recollect anybody interested in politics would take footling problem grasping the content, but odds are they'd be pretty bored.

I strongly disagree with Waltz's politics. I read the book to more closely familiarise myself with core realist thinkers, and Waltz does a good job of outlining the realist case. His argumentation is strong, equally long as you take certain assumptions and share certain perspectives. The main trouble is that he completely fails to discredit other perspectives. This volume will tell you what realism is, but information technology probably won't practise much to persuade you of its superiority over any other theoretical approach to IR. I was just left with a bad taste in my rima oris.

...more

You lot'll observe that I've refrained from giving information technology a star rating.

This is a volume I suffered through during my coursework. Since I read it at a time when I was heavily burdened past the constraints of time, I might call back differently of information technology today.

Nonetheless, I'll have to be thoroughly convinced to give this book some other endeavour.

At first blush, it seems like the thought of looking at different levels of analysis is a very good thought. However, I got the sense throughout the book that Waltz wasn't giving each

You lot'll notice that I've refrained from giving it a star rating.

This is a volume I suffered through during my coursework. Since I read information technology at a time when I was heavily burdened by the constraints of time, I might call back differently of it today.

Nevertheless, I'll take to be thoroughly convinced to give this book another endeavour.

At first chroma, it seems similar the idea of looking at different levels of analysis is a very good idea. Even so, I got the sense throughout the book that Waltz wasn't giving each level its due. This suspicion turned to downright hostility once I discovered that one of the levels was eventually to "win" in the end, making me believe that I had been led down a pre-designed path rather than on a journey of theoretical discovery.

I call up some of my suspicion would have been disarmed if Waltz had structured how he was going to interrogate each level.

There is ane undeniable fact about this book -- it impacted the field of International Relations greatly. So fifty-fifty if yous don't read the book (and I don't think you should), I yet think yous should know the book and how it impacted the field. Peculiarly since other, better books, brand reference to it.

...more

Oct 07, 2018 KimNica rated it liked it

3,five stars

Waltz writes well and this is not a difficult read, but at the end of the day information technology is a glorified literature review that seeks to ground neorealist thought in classic philosophy. As such it is liable to the charge that to link Thucydides and Machiavelli to realism is simply an exercise in narrative construction on the part of the realists, besides every bit to the usual criticisms of this arroyo to IR. Further, the works that Waltz chooses to review for each of his "images" seem to be called acc

3,five stars

Waltz writes well and this is not a difficult read, only at the end of the day it is a glorified literature review that seeks to footing neorealist thought in classic philosophy. As such information technology is liable to the charge that to link Thucydides and Machiavelli to realism is just an exercise in narrative construction on the office of the realists, also as to the usual criticisms of this approach to IR. Farther, the works that Flit chooses to review for each of his "images" seem to exist chosen according to the fancy of the author rather than whatever thought-out arrangement. Notably, the word of the second image is almost solely a discussion of Marxism.

On the plus side, chapter VI explains the essence of neorealism well, and I appreciated Waltz' admission that neither of the images lone can offer a satisfying analysis of world politics, as well as his nuanced reading of Machiavelli.

...more

Aug 03, 2007 Naeem rated it liked it

A simple and crucial insight is at the heart of this book: states relating to each other create a structure -- a structure that then determines the actions of states. A must read for anyone with pretensions to studying International Relations.

This is how someone either untrained in dialectics, or someone who refuses to engage in such language, talks about dialectics. How can we know that he might not know his dialectics? Because at crucial stages of the argument he fails to employ dialectics. His

A simple and crucial insight is at the heart of this book: states relating to each other create a construction -- a construction that and so determines the actions of states. A must read for anyone with pretensions to studying International Relations.

This is how someone either untrained in dialectics, or someone who refuses to engage in such language, talks about dialectics. How tin we know that he might not know his dialectics? Because at crucial stages of the statement he fails to use dialectics. His explicit commitments, of course, are to positivism.

...more

May 29, 2020 Felix Krull rated it really liked it

The basic premise of anarchic structure of international politics has remained intact despite the passing of important events and the appearance of new trends since 1959, one of them being the increased legitimacy of multilateral institutions. The book remains therefore relevant, but and so does the critique about largely ignoring cultural, historical, and economic factors when tackling the question of war.

Jun 23, 2014 Jennifer rated it it was astonishing

Waltz's logical, footstep past stride analysis of why war and peace are all-time understood at the systemic level of assay and the basis for his after, starker, neorealism. Waltz's logical, step by step analysis of why war and peace are all-time understood at the systemic level of analysis and the footing for his afterward, starker, neorealism. ...more

Jan 22, 2022 ivan rated it information technology was ok

read for a international relations grade and skipped through some chapters, i mean information technology does provide a somewhat interesting theoretical assay of war, supported by a bunch of classical political philosophy and real world examples, if u similar neorrealism you deceit go incorrect with waltz rly, i just wasnt that captivated past most of the ideas presented tbf

Jun 01, 2016 Eitental rated it actually liked it

This is a work that seeks to answer one of humanity'south most important questions: why is there state of war? Rather than offering empirical assay – an approach dismissed due to lack of clear data – Waltz takes a theoretical approach, surveying and critically analysing the different ways that diverse philosophers, politicians, academics and others accept addressed the question. He identifies three main schools of thought (or, equally he terms them, "images of international relations"): the first sees the ultima This is a work that seeks to answer i of humanity'south about of import questions: why is there war? Rather than offering empirical analysis – an arroyo dismissed due to lack of articulate data – Flit takes a theoretical approach, surveying and critically analysing the different ways that diverse philosophers, politicians, academics and others accept addressed the question. He identifies three main schools of idea (or, every bit he terms them, "images of international relations"): the first sees the ultimate cause of war within human being; the 2nd explains war as acquired by certain types of states; and the 3rd sees the problem in the inter-state organisation.

Waltz is highly disquisitional of the first image, which he attributes primarily to behavioural scientists (i.e. psychologists, sociologists and anthropologists) and which tin can manifest itself either as the belief that the moral improvement of individuals would prevent war, or that war is unavoidable as humans are inevitably imperfect. Waltz'southward objection to this epitome is summed up nicely in the following quotation: "Since everything is related to human nature, to explain anything one must consider more than human nature". He analyses the ideas of various individual proponents of this image, pointing out a tendency amid them to exist either vague or unrealistic (peculiarly in terms of their prescriptions).

Waltz is equally disquisitional of the 2nd paradigm, which he attributes to socialists (both truthful Marxists and "revisionists") and classical liberals as well as to Kant, and which can be summed up as the conventionalities that if all states were perfect in that location would be no state of war. Firstly, he points out that dissimilar definitions of perfection create conflict (a belief in one country that all states should be liberal democracies is not compatible with a conventionalities in some other country that all states should exist proletarian dictatorships). Secondly, he borrows Rousseau's statement that fifty-fifty if a state were internally perfect, its interests could still clash significantly with those of some other state (east.g. two liberal democracies could still fight over resources).

It is the third image that Waltz sees as the near compelling. He looks importantly at the writings of Rousseau, who he argues supported this position. He looks at the instance of trade tariffs, which he describes as beneficial to no-one, and claims that they exist considering "in a condition of anarchy […] relative gain is more important than accented gain". He then goes on to requite an fantabulous explanation of game theory and "balance of power" politics, arguing that a "balance of power" policy is likely to be pursued so long as there'due south no supra-country authority to ensure peace and stability. He points out astutely that a land interim too peacefully may lead to state of war by strengthening and emboldening an assailant, whereas a state acting too assertively may lead to war by intimidating neighbours.

Unsurprisingly, in the end Waltz concludes that to fully understand the causes of war, i must consider all three images. However, he argues that the third image is fundamentally different to the commencement and second, proverb that the first and second images depict "accidental" causes, whereas the 3rd describes the "underlying" cause (i.e. why the "accidents" tin can or practise lead to war). He explains that while the interstate system apparently doesn't directly cause 1 state to assault another (the immediate causes are contained in the showtime and second images), it makes it unfeasible for states (or individuals) to unilaterally become more peaceful. Finally, he concludes that although particular issues that crusade wars (many of which are quite lilliputian) could often easily be solved rationally, they solitary are not adequate to explain war, and equally such their rational settlement is not enough to prevent wars from occurring.

The piece of work is well written, clear and very thorough, though as it is written from a purely theoretical perspective, some readers may find it a bit dry (concrete historical examples are few and far between). Flit's arguments seem audio, though equally I oasis't personally read the works of whatsoever of the theorists he critiques, I tin't estimate how fairly or accurately he represents them. His conclusions are certainly still relevant today, despite the fact that nearly half a century has passed since its original publication, though in the age of ethnic disharmonize and international terrorism it's worth adding the proviso that this work deals only with interstate wars. The merely major shortcoming worth mentioning is the fact that, although he identifies chaos betwixt states equally the main cause of interstate war, Waltz dismisses supranational government without really explaining why. This seems particularly strange to the xx-first century reader, living in the age of globalization, where regional blocs are often as important equally states.

...more

For ane of my first reads about political science, this book has given me a great want to dig deeper into the topic. It is sometimes very dense, and some paragraphs will need to be read multiples times to grasp the their full significant, it is worth making the effort nonetheless, as the ideas expressed are very thought-provoking.

The volume looks at three reasons for war that were expressed by great thinkers of past times - Spinoza, Kant, and Rousseau, in item. The iii reasons are: homo, the due south

For one of my commencement reads about political science, this book has given me a keen desire to dig deeper into the topic. It is sometimes very dense, and some paragraphs will need to exist read multiples times to grasp the their full pregnant, it is worth making the effort nevertheless, as the ideas expressed are very thought-provoking.

The book looks at three reasons for war that were expressed past great thinkers of past times - Spinoza, Kant, and Rousseau, in particular. The 3 reasons are: homo, the structure of states, and the interaction between states in the international organisation.

Flit doesn't object to the existence of a link between human being nature and war, but points out that our agreement of our nature is too express to be able to give accurate answers. Additionally, if man could be improved, what goals are to be achieved ? Ultimately, men accept dissimilar goals and opinions of what is right. These disparities are a path to disharmonize. One very compelling argument: "If men were ever at war, or always at peace, the question why at that place is state of war, or why at that place is peace, would never arise. What does account for alternation of periods of war and peace ?" Human being cannot be the cause of war and peace at the aforementioned time.
Homo nature is certainly a crusade of war, but it is not the just i, and no 1 has a articulate answer as to how information technology should be improved. Thus, Waltz turns to politics.

The structure of states could certainly lower the occurrence of war, if they were all perfect. If one country is imperfect, its imperfection volition lead information technology to assail others. In this situation, how should the other perfect states act ? Should they attack the imperfect state preemptively before information technology has the upper mitt and has the power to destroy them ? In a situation where ane imperfect land is plenty to topple the balance of peace, the solution of perfect land construction for all states seems feeble.

The determination of this book is that war can exist explained mostly past the land of anarchy in which states find themselves. Indeed, united states are in the same situation man was in before authorities, with its monopoly on the apply of strength, came into place. In a context where no entity has the power to decide who is right or incorrect (and actually has the power to enforce its decision) in a quarrel between states, war is bound to happen in some occasions. As Waltz says: "Then what explains war among states? Rousseau's answer is actually that war occurs because at that place is aught to preclude it."
Although human and the structure of state can explain wars on a case to example basis, information technology is the lack of a stiff international czar that enables them to exist.

...more

I have no hesitation in admitting that, I felt devoid of intellectual capacity while reading this book. If someone is undergoing research in the field of political scientific discipline and International Relations, this volume should be the guiding calorie-free to your research, as it provides crude abstractions from the political philosophers from beyond the era like Spinoza, Kant, Rousseau et al. The sayings of political philosophers lays down the fundamental basis for the theoretical formulations of the causes of w I take no hesitation in admitting that, I felt devoid of intellectual chapters while reading this book. If someone is undergoing research in the field of political science and International Relations, this book should be the guiding light to your research, as it provides rough abstractions from the political philosophers from across the era similar Spinoza, Kant, Rousseau et al. The sayings of political philosophers lays downwardly the primal footing for the theoretical formulations of the causes of war. Information technology further provides enormous inkling to the understanding of the causes of ii World Wars.

The book formulates three images of International systems. There are three underlying causes of state of war, according to Waltz viz homo beliefs, internal structure of states, and International Anarchy; subsequently validating information technology with examples, which was discussed at length in the following chapter. To me the interesting role of the volume was, when Waltz was establishing relation between International Socialism and International conflict. How wave of socialism in 19th century shaped the politics European country, in item hawkish state like Germany. The socialist party in Germany was strongest among all socialist parties of the time. Socialism as an ideology emerged in reaction to commercialism, providing an alternative model of economic system, overtly condemning imperialism and state aggression against other, eventually chose to back up in the war.

The contradictory behavior of socialist party seems baffling but rational, says Waltz. States survival and self preservation is contingent upon guarding it's self interest from getting affected from it'southward potential rival state. And as far equally Country will be, war is inevitable. Socialism unveils a stateless society, if this suggestion is extended farther, we will find that Socialism does have the near perfect ideological coherence between absence of state and extinguishing of war. But hither the contradiction slips into when socialist parties of European countries supporting their private country to defend itself from the aggressor state.

The book, thus having interesting concepts and framework with reference to how the Earth political system operates, yet, we take to admit that author is trying to construct theoretical analysis of the causes of state of war. So someone interested in broadening it's concept in the field of International Relations tin pick up this book.

...more

Aug 02, 2020 Katie Nissen rated it really liked it

This is a really engaging book and a fun read. It'south got a cracking explanation of realist logic in IR, and flows succinctly through an caption and analysis of the 3 "images" that can be used to explain causes of war: 1) inside human, 2) inside individual state structures, and iii) within the international system itself.

While I don't ultimately concord with all of Flit'southward assumptions, his logic certainly tracks for the most part if you buy into his assumptions and get along for the ride. My main c

This is a really engaging book and a fun read. It'due south got a peachy explanation of realist logic in IR, and flows succinctly through an explanation and assay of the three "images" that tin can be used to explain causes of war: 1) within man, 2) within individual state structures, and iii) within the international organization itself.

While I don't ultimately concord with all of Flit'due south assumptions, his logic certainly tracks for the nearly role if you buy into his assumptions and go on for the ride. My main criticism is that this is a largely white, Western, male person perspective on IR (but that's all of realism, really). Overall, I think it's worth the read to understand realism in IR (and since so many powerful people subscribe to that philosophy and deed accordingly, it'south worth understanding), only it should certainly be paired with critical thought virtually underlying assumptions and the generalizability of an argument that does not include many time periods or parts of the world.

...more

Waltz authored the original work in 1954. During that fourth dimension, his piece of work was seminal in the field of international relations and war and peace studies. At first, his dissertation committee did not empathise his objective, but they saw the value in the comprehensive nature of "Man, the Country, and War" that they allowed Waltz to continue. Overall, post-obit Flit's writing style is very difficult to follow. Waltz seems so overwhelmed with the information that he is trying to put as much into his work as p Waltz authored the original work in 1954. During that time, his work was seminal in the field of international relations and war and peace studies. At starting time, his dissertation committee did non understand his objective, but they saw the value in the comprehensive nature of "Man, the State, and War" that they allowed Flit to continue. Overall, following Waltz'southward writing manner is very hard to follow. Waltz seems so overwhelmed with the information that he is trying to put as much into his piece of work as possible. The reader is and then left scrambling to remember key points as a event of Flit'southward method of presenting evidence. He manages to answer his iii questions and ensure he articulates his Waltz hoped place a tendency every bit to why war starts and determine if prescriptions are available to inoculate states from external disharmonize. Flit states the propensity to peace in international conflict may increase the likelihood of war. He then assesses that autocratic regimes will take advantage of peaceful states to pressure these states into suing for peace. Waltz'south last cess that states human activity in their own interest and this method embodies a reasons response to the world is the bedrock of 20th Century Diplomacy. ...more

I heard that Flit's 'Man, the State, and War' was dumbo nevertheless I foolishly did not heed such warnings. Waltz uses three lenses to understand why war occurs: the individual, the state, and the international loonshit. To analyse each lens he uses a number of scholars whose works are considered seminal in each field, framing them every bit inhabiting 1 of two (or 2.5 sometimes) perspectives. For example, the individual is understood as inhabiting either optimistic or cynical world views which are then tease I heard that Flit's 'Man, the Country, and State of war' was dumbo yet I foolishly did non heed such warnings. Waltz uses three lenses to understand why war occurs: the individual, the country, and the international loonshit. To analyse each lens he uses a number of scholars whose works are considered seminal in each field, framing them as inhabiting one of two (or 2.v sometimes) perspectives. For case, the individual is understood as inhabiting either optimistic or contemptuous globe views which are and so teased out to better understand the origins of conflict. The larger framing of the book is to bear witness that these three lens interlink, but Waltz is hesitant to decisively conclude the details of the how.
I recollect that 'Human, the Country, and War' is going to be ane of those books that I will accept to render to over again, and soon, to best sympathise Waltz'southward statement. Until and so, it certainly has provided a wider perspective on the beliefs underpinning i of the colossus' in the field of International Relations. ...more than

Jul 23, 2011 Ike Sharpless rated it actually liked information technology

As with many such classics, this book requires a substantial groundwork in the social contract tradition to properly engage with its core arguments. (I could write a like review of various other works - reviews of Leviathan that take no account of the destabilizing effects of the English civil wars, or reviews of Paradise Lost or Faust that completely ignore how pretty much the unabridged Western catechism is wrapped upward in the narrative, for example) A 'four star' review doesn't mean that I agree wit As with many such classics, this book requires a substantial groundwork in the social contract tradition to properly engage with its cadre arguments. (I could write a like review of diverse other works - reviews of Leviathan that have no account of the destabilizing effects of the English language civil wars, or reviews of Paradise Lost or Faust that completely ignore how pretty much the entire Western catechism is wrapped up in the narrative, for example) A '4 star' review doesn't mean that I agree with Waltz's structural realism - I'm a constructivist through and through - merely that information technology's a powerful statement, powerfully stated. ...more

Apr 28, 2008 Jason rated it actually liked it

Recommends information technology for: Poli Sci majors, masochists

Buckle upward kiddies this is a deep ane. I'd imagine this is a book that one would read when forced to by some angry poli-sci teacher. Well I read information technology without prompting and so fuck you i'm crawly. Neat ideas based on where conflict comes from, while i haven't read it recently (and most of information technology was too dumbo for my waek mind) i can summize information technology like this: War comes from either, man's nature, the nature of states, or the lack of supervisory control over states. In the end we become a cop out answer stating it Buckle upwards kiddies this is a deep ane. I'd imagine this is a volume that ane would read when forced to by some angry poli-sci teacher. Well I read it without prompting and so fuck you i'm crawly. Great ideas based on where conflict comes from, while i haven't read information technology recently (and well-nigh of information technology was as well dumbo for my waek mind) i can summize it like this: War comes from either, man'southward nature, the nature of states, or the lack of supervisory control over states. In the end we become a cop out answer stating it is all 3, well bah humbug, and so much for solving anything. ...more than

M. Flit tries to argue the statement that "Realpolitik" in world policy is shifted by the new (generally liberal) theories. He provides the facts of misanderstanding in the postbipolar world, and sometimes this approach is seemed to be constructivistic. It could exist explained with the words of R. Aronm who claimed the death of the "articulate approaches" and reagarded the realism equally the most cummulative ideology, which absorbed other methods. I actually recommend this book as a practiced ane guide on the neore K. Waltz tries to debate the statement that "Realpolitik" in world policy is shifted by the new (mostly liberal) theories. He provides the facts of misanderstanding in the postbipolar world, and sometimes this approach is seemed to be constructivistic. Information technology could be explained with the words of R. Aronm who claimed the death of the "clear approaches" and reagarded the realism as the most cummulative ideology, which captivated other methods. I actually recommend this book as a proficient one guide on the neorealistic theory. ...more than

May 09, 2016 Art rated it it was amazing

Why do humans become to war? Is it possible to abolish war? Using arguments from classical and contemporary philosophers, the author analyzes this complicated subject area focusing on three "images" or areas of the problem. The first image concerns human nature, the 2d the structure of different types of states, and finally the unconventional international organisation of states. Because the subject field is multifaceted and extremely complicated, the author hits the images from a variety of viewpoints. A fascinati Why exercise humans go to war? Is it possible to abolish war? Using arguments from classical and contemporary philosophers, the author analyzes this complicated field of study focusing on three "images" or areas of the trouble. The first prototype concerns human nature, the second the structure of unlike types of states, and finally the anarchistic international organisation of states. Because the field of study is multifaceted and extremely complicated, the author hits the images from a variety of viewpoints. A fascinating read! ...more than

Sep 30, 2017 Wissam Raji rated it it was amazing

An first-class book that summarizes answers of many thinkers over the years to the following question: what causes state of war? The writer discusses the bespeak of view of various thinkers and how many of them blamed state of war on man nature, others on the states and others on the state organization of governance. However, he reaches the decision that those three images combined usually play a role in the initiation of wars. Recommended read.

The 3 perspectives it offers is enough, however I wish it explored other perspectives as well, not to the extent of the main 3 but faucets such every bit the relationship between country, religion, and homo and the effect that has on modernistic warfare equally well. Information technology was a bit bland at times as well, yet it's a PhD thesis, not a dedicated novel and then I'll let that pass. I enjoyed reading the perspective that human being is the root of all wars, and I agree with that faucet the nearly. The 3 perspectives information technology offers is plenty, even so I wish information technology explored other perspectives likewise, not to the extent of the main 3 but faucets such as the relationship between state, religion, and human being and the result that has on modern warfare every bit well. It was a bit bland at times besides, however it's a PhD thesis, not a dedicated novel and so I'll let that pass. I enjoyed reading the perspective that human being is the root of all wars, and I concord with that faucet the most. ...more

May 18, 2019 Ghostholos rated it actually liked it

Even if you disagree with the conclusions of this book, it is still worth reading. Waltz very sincerely approaches the issue of why wars take identify with the assumption that if we improve understand the "why" then we can respond how to forestall them. A noble pursuit, regardless of what one concludes. In we are given i approach that seems reasonable plenty in many ways, although I (perhaps instinctively) disagree with many of his conclusions. Even if you disagree with the conclusions of this volume, information technology is still worth reading. Flit very sincerely approaches the upshot of why wars take place with the assumption that if we better empathize the "why" then we can answer how to forbid them. A noble pursuit, regardless of what ane concludes. In we are given i approach that seems reasonable enough in many ways, although I (peradventure instinctively) disagree with many of his conclusions. ...more

I read this book for my Theory of International Relations class and information technology was a scrap of a dry read. Too the references were sometimes old, only that is expected from a volume from the l's. The theories were good though and information technology was well written. I liked the organizational structure of the book, information technology made it easy to follow. I read this book for my Theory of International Relations course and it was a bit of a dry out read. Besides the references were sometimes quondam, but that is expected from a volume from the fifty's. The theories were good though and it was well written. I liked the organizational structure of the book, information technology fabricated information technology piece of cake to follow. ...more than

An excellent theoretical footing for understanding the realist theory of international relations. Waltz is conscientious to provide fair analysis of the differing viewpoints before outlining their defects. Truly a theoretical work as opposed to intellectual history, and a skillful one at that. To read him is to grapple with the same issues of understanding the international organization today.

If you've already got a stiff background in International Relations, this book provides valuable, if not slightly dated, insight into the causes of war. This being said, not having a strong noesis base on the topic, I had great difficulty getting through this one. If you've already got a strong background in International Relations, this volume provides valuable, if not slightly dated, insight into the causes of war. This beingness said, not having a strong knowledge base on the topic, I had bully difficulty getting through this 1. ...more than

Nov 08, 2008 Rich rated information technology really liked it

I was impressed past a quote in the beginning that noted that "figuring out who won a nuclear state of war was like trying to figure out who won the San Francisco earthquake." I was impressed by a quote in the beginning that noted that "figuring out who won a nuclear war was like trying to figure out who won the San Francisco earthquake." ...more

Jun 21, 2009 James rated it actually liked information technology

An excellent book on Realism. Very objective writing and very informative.

Jun 24, 2009 Joel Brady rated information technology really liked it

this is an fantabulous primer for those interested in international relations.

Related Articles

Thirty-four years after the publication of her dystopian archetype, The Handmaid's Tale, Atwood returns to continue the story of Offred. We talked...

"War and the threat of war stimulate speculation upon the weather condition of peace." — 4 likes

"When Ranke argued that the external relations, of states make up one's mind their internal conditions, his argument had considerable cogency." — i likes

More quotes…

Welcome back. Merely a moment while nosotros sign you in to your Goodreads business relationship.

barnhartdide1956.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/117002.Man_the_State_and_War

Share this post