Structural Realism - International Relations (1/7)

[@baran8074]

It has FISH on its eastern border and FISH on its western border.

[@k80_]

this is like the fuckin jordan peterson lobster thing omg

[@elbens_gabriel]

This phrase is actually really important and has a greater meaning behind it. The US only has two borders, and all the other powerful countries are far way on the other side of the oceans. This makes development and peace much more easier than in Germany, for example, who has more than 10 borders and is surrounded by potential enemies.

[@sumitshresth]

@@elbens_gabriel well US has mexico to worry about.

[@msi8311]

@Sumit Shrestha Mexico worries about US more than US worries about Mexico, considering the power difference.

[@Monalex89]

@@sumitshresth but Mexico is not a threat to their national security or territorial integrity, Mexico would have to be completly bonkers and crazy, to attack militarily the USA. On the other hand, Mexico's existence depends upon the USA generosity, Mexico already lost half of its territory to the USA, so this is a real existential threat. Before you mention migration as a threat, that does not come even close to the type of danger countries in Europe has to deal with, with so many countries of similar power within their borders, who may attack at any moment, which is what Prof Mearshmeir is referring to.

[@bjoripziriousnorgeign7076]

Damn his way to teach is so good. Everything is going in the head. Explains the ideals of top universities.

[@ayaelalqarni1559]

love how he explained it so clearly in only 10 min. meanwhile my prof takes two hours

[@FernandoSilva-fp2ng]

Mine too 😑

[@ХареКришна-т7г]

That's because he's a Realist too (neo)

[@JMM333]

Don't trust your Profs. Hunt them.

[@antonostmark2032]

Agree, it's silly how much you spend in terms of money and time on a university degree, when there is so much free education out there online. But you need the degree in order to prove your abilities... although the degree itself doesn't mean you know more than a guy that sits at home and watch youtube clips...

[@tiaraathabellaaa]

i take a billion hours to understand by book that i read

[@casandrap2809]

I'm doing a research paper on structural realism so having mersheimer explain it personally, is amazing!

[@JMM333]

hmm, i consider myself a offensive realistic neocon without the "neo" in "neo-realism", because of Freud.

[@diridhaba]

The lecturers of the universities have complicated giving a clear explanation for what realism stands for, thank you very much sir, you have absolutely gave me a clear idea of what structural realism is, I will be very lucky to attend one of your lectures.

[@ViperOfMino]

It's because while Realism is a simple theory to explain, the world is not a place where simple things happen in a straightforward fashion. This is a great baseline introduction, but to really apply it you need to do a ton of case studies of very complex real-world situations. And that's not something that universities can just "give a clear explanation" for.

[@rikb2647]

International Relations exam tomorrow. I do agree with everything he says.

[@parthsharma3325]

After 7 years this video uploaded,China's prediction is becoming a harsh true Hats off to this genius man🙏

[@imanebenkhelifa1925]

Clear, simple & precise! What a perfect way to explain structural realism ! Thank you for your excellency and may uni teachers learn from his skills!!

[@honey__]

wow. this is so clear. Thank you very much

[@annielailailai]

Suddenly everything makes so much sense!

[@OccasionallyEpic]

This guy is awesome, I was listening to him for a while and then realised it was Mearsheimer when he started using some lines from his book. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics is really good, well worth a read.

[@JmaJeremy514]

Ben Walker Best IR book I've ever read!

[@Vannchanboramey]

Same

[@tmanley111]

Had a professor try to explain this in a review session today. This guy is so much better

[@bragosng1]

Well, his texts are subject of study for universities around the world... He knows this stuff quite well lol

[@caffeinator1849]

I mean this guy made the theories

[@emediongumoh1053]

So awesome!! Just what i need for my exams

[@Nicer2BNice]

If you haven’t noticed, everything that John Mearsheimer has had to say, and all of his advice, has all been exactly spot on for the past few decades. Both the US and the world at large would have been doing ourselves a huge favor if we had taken his advice.

[@karunaadubey6606]

Wow… no one could have explained the international situation so well and made it understandable like a cake walk based on real theory… I do support what you explained sir. We are evidently witnessing the same thing as you predicted. Thank you.

[@MOTO_HUB__]

Sosi hyi

[@jiwonk6910]

Mr. Mearsheimer is my favorite IR theorist. His take on US foreign policy always interests me.

[@jayeshyadav8554]

The disinterested approach of his while understanding his own theory that he supports is mesmerizing

[@asianshoegaze2342]

"yuuman nature"

[@Toki1908]

"yuuman beings"

[@TheDannyc1991]

this ruined the whole video for me

[@cesarbustamante3723]

@@TheDannyc1991 it's caused by the youman instinct

[@miryamgutierrez4870]

4 years after you commented this and here I am watching this as I write my midterm for world politics cracking up at this comment because I cannot unhear him saying "youman" LOL.

[@renzarriola8555]

This was produced 7 years ago yet the way he saw China's economic rise is unbelievably true now that we are in 2021. China has indeed showed it wants to be dominant, but not just in Asia alone, but in the world. What leaders have failed to anticipate is how fast and aggressive they want to achieve this goal.

[@pelvicthrustful]

Leaders? Any leader that isn't aware of China's rise must A Be a leader of a tropical island or B on Mars. Particularly their expansion in Africa. China are doing what they Europeans did in the 1870s . With more subtlety

[@TorianTammas]

Everyone saw China rise for more than 20 years. This is so obvious to everyone and everyone said so.

[@PreetamNayak1]

He is one of the original propounders of structural realism bro..# John mearsheimer

[@rigelsg3087]

The desire for power might come from fear of being hurt, farther more this desire might come from noble motives that come from places men can't rich but those contents reach to us

[@Zher0-]

This guy explains better than 38 pgs that I need to read and 3 hrs of lesson from my teacher..

[@Joao-pe8ur]

Two things I want from Mearsheimer: understanding of his theory and his intense gaze. Dude's a predator.

[@jeromywong6041]

a predator of knowledge

[@Patc-n6n]

He’s an academic. He’s enthusiastic about his insights and learning. As a diplomat or politician he would need a different affect. He’s an academic.

[@terrapax5065]

Thanks for making this freely available!

[@emreozgun3846]

Upon completion, I concluded that: 'Geopolitics is the combination of both the potential and kinetic energy of civilizations'. Actually learned the origin of the word politics for the first time in my life as well. I'll never see the 'POLICE' the same way I did before. Any introductory book recommendations ?

[@yenisitihajarritonga7670]

I just started the theories of internasional relations and by watching this video, now i am lovin it

[@isatousarr7044]

"Structural realism, or neorealism, is a key theory in international relations that emphasizes the anarchic nature of the international system as a primary factor influencing state behavior. Developed by Kenneth Waltz, structural realism posits that the absence of a central authority in global politics forces states to act in their own self-interest to survive and maintain power. This leads to a self-help system where security and power are paramount, and states are constantly assessing the balance of power to ensure their own security. Unlike classical realism, which emphasizes human nature as the driver of state behavior, structural realism focuses on the structure of the international system itself as the determining factor. States are considered rational actors who seek to maximize their security in an environment where other states may have competing interests. This theory explains why nations engage in alliances, build military capabilities, or adopt defensive and offensive strategies, often irrespective of ideological or moral considerations. Critics of structural realism argue that it overlooks the role of domestic politics, international institutions, and the potential for cooperation among states. However, its enduring relevance lies in its capacity to provide a framework for understanding the competitive and power-centric dynamics of global politics. As we face new challenges such as the rise of China, the reassertion of Russia, and shifting alliances, structural realism continues to offer valuable insights into why states behave the way they do and what drives their actions on the world stage.

[@mahmut3616]

clear, simple and fluent he explained it in effective way

[@MaxArvidsson-f8c]

🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:07 *🌍 Structural realism overview* - States' behaviors are primarily shaped by the anarchic structure of the international system. - States seek power to ensure security in a system where there's no higher authority. - Example: The United States' dominance in the Western hemisphere ensures its security. 01:03 *🏛️ Security and power dynamics* - An anarchic international system compels states to pursue power for self-preservation. - Vulnerability of weaker states in the absence of a higher authority fosters security competition. - Importance of power to deter aggression and ensure survival in international relations. 03:22 *🤔 Realism: human nature vs. structural factors* - Contrast between human nature realism (e.g., Morgenthau) and structural realism (e.g., Waltz). - Human nature realists emphasize innate human tendencies towards power-seeking. - Structural realists focus on how the anarchic structure of the system drives state behavior. 05:46 *🌐 Theory's focus on war and peace* - Realism addresses major international political questions like war and peace. - Parsimonious nature of realism provides straightforward explanations for significant events. - Theoretical frameworks should prioritize explaining crucial international dynamics. Made with HARPA AI

[@hulyaalkan2386]

Thank yu very much I really appreciated it.As an IR student

[@SJames-fn5mk]

thank you for being that clear!

[@HOBSTERthe22]

real yuman being and a real hero

[@quotes3874]

That was clear, short and on-point hours in class while my professor joking < 10 minutes on KZbin

[@nasirkhan595]

Wonderful (simple) explanation thank you sir

[@khadijhaarib4646]

bestever explanation i found on internet..thx

[@immanueldiai8089]

I like how he stated his theory of how the international system works without bad mouthing the human nature basis of political realism.

[@AIFeAai]

the individual behavior of a state is a function of the architecture of the international system of which it is an integral part

[@mutafire]

Was there a time before states when there was no subjugation? So when was the anarchy being stated here born? Is there anarchy?

[@larrymckeithan7308]

Anarchy as explained here has existed as long as there has been multiple states. Anarchy would only not exist if there was a world government in authority over all states. It may sound odd since there isn't constant war worldwide. Other explanations for the lack of such conditions include liberalism.

[@abdinasirhassan7529]

very wonderful lecture. it is the most effective and understandable lecture i have even seen

[@EmmanuelEdusei-o6y]

Super helpful. Great to grasp the foundation to understand realism.

[@julienjeanmuller]

He talks about China's intentions to become a Hegemony 8 years ago. And his prediction was spot on. Why don't people listen to this guy!!!!!!

[@ShayNoMore1]

You re brainwashed in 2014

[@williamwigmore1968]

That was only 2015 and 16. It didn’t exactly take a genius to figure that out.

[@lutherblissett9070]

He was saying it in the 90s

[@yaronnn]

superb explanation, thank you

[@davidnathan4489]

I love his NY accent. SMOAWLL, YUUMAN, COAWLL

[@quasarsavage]

lol very bernie like :) yuuuuman

[@teresacunhaesa8120]

I have a follow-up question. How does realism explain the end of the Cold War?

[@novejk]

How easily he explained the whole thing in shortest time period for which my university professor took two days of 1 hour classes each.

[@stijnfeenstra7403]

What difference is there from the older theory of realism ?

[@MuhammadHamza-ve6ce]

This man is so right, and we are witnessing now in 2021 that to counter China, USA went into AUKUS agreement with Australia and Brian -- and went in to QUAD-4 with India, UK and Japan ..

[@mawe5303]

I like his way to explain the foundation of the realism and the difference between structural realism and the theorie of human nature as its basic subject, like it was argued by morgenthau. Though i can´t agree with the international system being a pure anarchy itself. The anarchy of the international system he is describing is depending on the view of only competing isolated states that persue only their own intentions and reach for power to provide safety. Actually in a world that is getting more and more global there are so much more examples of international institutions that can be seen as actors. Thus anarchy isn´t a unchangeable structure but a structure created by the theoretical view of realism. Realism isolates states not seing the potential of cooperating power of states, international organisations as institutions and regimes that provide global agreements of law, peace and the protection of the environment. Hes way of speaking and his arguments are really conclusive. But for me the basic thougts of realism are kind of pessimistic and can´t include a peaceful and global future. This way of looking at the world leads to a neo-conservative, and nationalistic foreign policy of the US as a tackled hegemonic super power that increasingly gets into conflict with rising powers of the OECD-States like China. As final aspect I also criticize that only with international unions the greatest and worrying problems of all human beings and states can be solved. Which are in my opinion the globalization of liberal economics and the question if there can be infinte growth as well as it spreads social injustice caused by its liberal character and its distribution of power (which outsources developing countries). And also the climate change. We can allready see that the developement of the present foreign-policy with trump quitting the Paris climate protection agreement and the focus on bordersecurity and the rising patriotism. In my opinion we should see the world through different eyes and accept that if we want to overwhelm the really overwhelming global problems we have to cooperate and put the selfinterest a side, get to know and trust each other and focus on changing the present system to a system which isnt just build in a very rational structure of economic growth and developement (which actually just works for the most powerful ones) but has the also rational aims and outcomes just as providing a healthy planet for following generations, peace and social justice and equality. Sometimes i think we allready stopped believing and trying to make it possible and just focus to rescue ourselfs at the expense of others.

[@mensrea1251]

Well, realism is a theoretical framework for seeing the world the way it is, not the way we wish it to be. It’s to my mind a foundational perspective for international relations if you want to stay alive. The problem with idealistic, non-anarchic systems is that they only work to a point, like laws. To a point, they can serve everyone within the system well when times are good. But times won’t always be good, states won’t always have the luxury of playing nice, often they feel an existential need to break the rules - whether the threat they feel is justified or not is irrelevant, since what matters is that state actors will continue to act on their subjective assessments. If climate change transforms most of the US into a desert wasteland, is there any doubt the US will find reason to justify some incursion into Canada? It could be a negotiated process, but it’s just as likely it will be something more violent. While unthinkable today, people forget Canada was at war with the US a century and a half ago. I don’t discount the role that the idealism fuelled tenets of liberal ideology plays in making the world better. Absolutely. But realism probably plays as much of a role, the two need to go hand in hand, you have to be prepared for the absolute worst always, because the consequences of getting it wrong are so catastrophic (ie extinction). You don’t risk that. Only a fundamental change to our biology or a radical reimagining of our ecosystem (eg free energy for everyone forever) can sustain an idealistic, non-anarchic, liberal world. It’s not going to happen any time soon.

[@pelvicthrustful]

Great reply. I think ( who am I to say) Mearsheimer would suggest the issue is - that we don't trust each other. Ergo anarchy

[@makiboybaboy]

This is the best theory to understand International politics when you are living outside world's superpowers.

[@othonpedro2870]

Good video , simple understand. Thank you

[@MrAlf30]

I live in NM and when I go to bed am not worrying about being getting attacked at night ,spot on .

[@n4mrogc]

"i do not believe that domestic politics...matters very much for how those states behave" dude you wrote a book called "the israel lobby and US foreign policy"

[@RileyRampant]

n4mrogc - i would argue that domestic politics is the milieu wherein the image of israel has been very carefully stage-managed as a process, over many decades, by every corner of the elite - i.e. a special case. but it is a great observation. the domestic grooming is the substructure for the foreign policy consensus, far from the other way around.

[@dilbhullar716]

i have struggled with this thought as well that on one hand hes a champion of structural realism and on other hand he is explaining domestic factors like israeli lobby,,, the answer to this is subtle -- one, he is saying that realism explains many things but it cannot claim to be perfect,,, second, nations seek power and national interest and it might be the case that US is calculating its national interest wrongly,,, and third, US has not really been tested on Israel policy, as in in one of Mearsheimer's lecture on Israeli lobby, i heard him say that US can listen to israeli lobby coz its so powerful that it is not feeling insecure,,,,,, u can see this changing in times to come as US gets more vulnerable then it will be real test.... hope u got the answers

[@dingodyno9016]

haha whether it was by luck or accident, you just put the exact sentence i needed to compare and contrast realism from liberalism for my exam, thanks pal xD

[@depressedessendonfan5702]

@@dingodyno9016 thats why its all theory. This guy holds this as for the most piece higher driver of state behaviour

[@Sebastian-ni4le]

@Shaving Pvt. Ryan Come back to this comment in 2025.

[@619RoyalFlush]

Incredible detail, very helpful.

[@mawludaakbari3776]

Many thanks for this useful video . He explained very well, very simple that everyone can understand .

[@aprillealcaraz8082]

As a junior highschool, thank you for the easy explanation! This helped me a lot

[@fjordhellas4077]

Is there a difference between Realism and Neo-Realism?

[@alfonlongable]

I don`t see my country, Spain, reflected in Mearsheimer's theories. We do not see France or Portugal as potential threats. The EU, with all its flaws, has succeeded in changing the view we European have of our neighbours. What he says may apply to some hegemonic countries, China, the US, but not to all nations.

[@AD.101.]

Thank you Dr mearsheimer

[@sambroughton5908]

The absence of a higher international government/authority does not necessarily make states vulnerable to attack, especially when they hold a close alliance with a superpower state I.e. Washington or Moscow

[@cheahao9124]

It`s clear for me now.... thank you!!!!!

[@abhaybisht8985]

Thanks a lot sir . You explained this concept of realism in modern dynamics and alos predicted the rise of China . Great lesson sir

[@latoilevierge1221]

Very clear speech. But if you don't consider domestic politics, how can you explain dramatic changes in international politics after the French or the Russian Revolutions? Why South Africa gave up its nuclear weapons after the Cold War? Why foreign policies of Carter and Reagan were so different? Do ideologies, values, interests of decision-makers have no impact on international relations? I think Raymond Aron and Richard Ned Lebow, for example, are really more sophisticated and more interesting.

[@alexnicklen5379]

I disagree with large parts of his theories but he is an amazing teacher.

[@putinelapipe7805]

why u do desagree with him ?????

[@williamwigmore1968]

@@putinelapipe7805Realism has been on the decline ever since the end of the Cold War because the assumption that a nation must be contained to its sphere of influence lest it lead to a great power conflict had been disproved. Countries do also heavily apply ideology to their national foreign policy, Afghanistan and the Taliban and the Sunni Shia conflict are a prime example along with Facist expansion in ww2.

[@MCD613]

Mearsheimer you so cool. thanks.

[@ziyanmir4302]

Its always great to see the renowned worldwide think tanks of global politics on a KZbin to clear misconception s . Long live Shaiemar

[@razikali9923]

Excellent lecture on structural realism

[@obaidullahahmadzai9599]

Thanks, simple understanding 🙏🏻

[@nafeesahmad2973]

You are simply superb

[@faithotunyo7836]

i love you prof#there is no way you can predict the feature without a theory........

[@hillaryschandorf9380]

This is really dope. I love this video, i like this proffessor

[@te098jgjgbjjkjkhk]

When Lenin came up with decree of peace he immediately gave up territory acquired by czarist Russia.. But such a move makes Russia less powerful by definition... How do you explain from realist view... Here domestic factors play role..

[@earthwokker]

he just said over and over you need to be really powerful to have security

[@arumalfiani14]

how about neoclassical realism?

[@mahmoodshahidi7508]

neoclassic realism is in fact morgenthaus thought .meanwhile the classic realism considered scholars such as machiavelli and Hobbes.

[@Kristin-hn5eu]

Neoclassical realism is the same thing as structural realism.

[@reubenobrey4608]

Where fish to the east and west means ?

[@ingenuity168]

Very good explanation 👏

[@sammy0722]

Its not the structure rather innate human nature to pursue a never ending quest for wealth, resources and power. It wants to ensure its dominance perpetually.

[@Tompsykhe]

I'm prety sure a huge majority of humans don't pursue that quest at all. Human nature arguments should account for every human behaviour, and neither now nor in the entire history one can really say that every human, because of its nature, pursues never ending wealth and power. It is simple not true.

[@mattbenz99]

2:40 But neither does Canada. This is a major problem with the Offensive Realist theory that Mearsheimer presents. If power was all that mattered then Canada would be having an arms race with America. Canada has all of the means to do this (they have he second largest stockpile of uranium in the entire world), yet Canada doesn't bother. This is what Mearsheimer fails to consider.

[@rsondhi4123]

Canada is vulnerable, they just don't realize it yet.

[@christophmahler]

The question is: is Canada a *sovereign* state or is a satelite either within e.g. the context of the Cold War structure of NORAD (which forbids thermo-nuclear arms to Canada) or within the context of the *'Commonwealth of Nations'* , the British Empire in all but title and bound in a *'special relationship'* to the US. Of course the same argument could be made about Mexico, but then again all efforts of Mexico to emancipate themselves from the US were thwarted to the point that the US military runs the 'war on drugs' while all foreign powers are barred from allying with Mexico due to the US *'Monroe-Doctrine'* . Only a technology that could garantuee quasi nuclear armament covertly _over night_ would change these given circumstances.

[@mensrea1251]

Canada was at war with the US a century and half ago. Things can always change again. If climate change transforms everything south of the 49th parallel into a desert, you can bet the US will find some justification for an incursion into Canadian territory, sovereignty be damned.

[@mensrea1251]

@@rsondhi4123 Canada has always been vulnerable. It probably does realize it to some extent. Notice the fawning, obsequiousness of its leaders to everything the US says.

[@Jeremy.Santos]

2:29 where did Hawaii go?

[@e7ebr0w]

It starts ground up. States are made of people. Therefore, states are subject to human nature, scaled up, and would act as a human would, no?

[@vincentmanengamambo3644]

Good job Prof I love your work so much

[@holylandnation7]

Balance of power to counter china from becoming a hegemony ,he explained Soo well

[@arminius6506]

Where can i find more lectures about IR???

[@emrahcengiz8880]

Well, two questions rise at this point: 1. Can IR be explained only with the "Power Distribution" regardless of the uniqueness of each state? 2. I really thought you're gonna make a point with that fish stuff sir. If not, why would you use that? Twice???

[@jamieanderson7757]

He's warning the US about being surrounded by may fish. If the fish form a powerful nation with malign intent the US is in big trouble.

[@pelvicthrustful]

Brilliant

[@user-ef2nc3dd5k]

Clear concept. Really exapmlery.

[@cfc1523]

I don’t necessarily disagree with his thesis, but in my opinion, people can get caught up in trying to find one theory that can sum up international relations, when it is very likely that both main schools of realism are true to some extent. I don’t find human nature and international structure to be mutually exclusive. I also subscribe to many principles of liberalism. From what I’ve learned, realism tends to describe how countries have tended to act in history, and liberalism describes how states should act in an ideal, efficient system. Essentially realism is more descriptive and liberalism is more instructional (couldn’t think of a better word). IR seems to only be able to explain why states have done/are doing things. Because of how broad IR is and how many factors can impact states’ actions (and that each nation’s actions/reactions can have a domino effect on one another), it becomes nearly impossible to predict any major changes before they happen. (And also that random factors cannot really be predicted; i.e. plagues, natural disasters, etc.). However, there are some glaring exceptions. The one that always comes to my mind is JM Keynes predicting the Great Depression and another large scale conflict in Europe decades before they happened very much as he described. So I guess you either have to be lucky or a genius to predict IR. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

[@cletuskapwenge8293]

WELL OUTLINED POINTS NICE CHANNEL

[@aqibqure123]

Great methodology ♥️

[@ruchikachoraria7837]

I love him❤️

[@kuljeetsingh2819]

simple but very effective to understand

[@hting8234]

Clear simple awsome

[@bigollameo]

I'll probably never find a theory of IR that's more internally coherent than Mearsheimer's structural realism.

[@asmahalimi6294]

Awesome 👏🏻

[@learn_techie]

E.H Carr is considered to be a realist and wants the national self interest to be considered first in foreign policy, but you have mentioned- he wants something in between realism and utopianism to be the best policy. I guess the argument of E.H Carr is flawed if he is a realist and then trying to find middle ground, can't be comprehended . What is middle ground in international relation :theorist perspective?

[@kaffekoppteiskrem]

Yeah this was very clear, nice explainer!

[@alfie8878]

shoutout to my besties doing A-Level politics xoxo this topic is hell

[@frederiquecouture3924]

Thank You 😊

[@syedusamamanzoor1838]

Well...... 2021.... and the gentleman's prediction was right.

[@meow1990_2]

Awesome, best explanation! :)

[@rhysperegrine5100]

I was a lot more sympathetic to realism than I thought I would be

[@youxkio]

Does realist theories only couple or work when it comes to authoritarian regimes that have imperialist ambitions?