Realism Vs Liberalism: Analysis of Different Sides of The Spectrum

Neo-realism and neo-liberalism try to provide 'covering laws' or to cover a broad variety of actions in a conceptual explanation of causal relationships like the Newtonian law of gravity which describes a certain relationship between all items (attraction, which is also the DV or effect on another variable) based on mass and distance (independent or causal factors) without taking into account the specific or spectrum. The aim for the essay is to explore similarities and differences in realism vs liberalism in a brief form. 

The Debate of Realism VS Liberalism: Similarities and Differences

The main similarity between these two concepts, which affects how nations should act, is how they see the structure of the world. For both Realism and Liberalism, 'a situation of anarchy exists outside the Government's borders.' This situation arises because there is no government in the world or a higher institution to control the relationship between different states. The state should find ways of living in the life of this anarchical society, and how it can do that is a major contrast between realism and liberalism. Realism, as well as liberalism, see war as something to prevent, morality may be a determinant of the latter intervening in a conflict. Liberalism assumes that states have a moral obligation to intervene when those principles are abused in the affairs of other States. Such principles should be basic human rights that every person in the world should enjoy, regardless of where he or she comes from. According to Liberalism, ideals such as order, democracy, justice, and equality should be defended by states and international institutions if the latter fails in their duty.

While realism emphasizes balancing actions among countries at the system level, liberalism looks to domestic actions created by the engagement of internal and external pressures (domestic politics is Waltz 's second image). One strand of this thought is that modern democratic regimes are less likely at war with each other (economic peace theory). A new formulation of liberalism aims at focusing on domestic behavior or preferences but integrating systemic pressures by influencing those domestic likes and dislikes. Realism is not focused on power centralization in foreign affairs, whereas liberalism is focused on power centralization. Power centralization effectively guarantees stability and security. Considering that it is both a qualitative and prescriptive theory or interpretation of international relations rooted in Italy during the Renaissance, the balance of power is preferred. Indeed, it can be argued that European politics' balance of power was an outsider rather than the normal course of events in other international systems.

Conclusion

Overall it can be noticed that both realism and liberalism is seeks to make a change in law system as well as in the society. So long as all objects have mass and distance, they can describe the relation between them. In the social sciences of IR, both liberalism and realism seek to do the same, but they each look at a particular collection of variables at a different level of study. 

Reference

• Miller, B. (2010). Contrasting explanations for peace: Realism vs. liberalism in Europe and the Middle East. Contemporary Security Policy, 31(1), 134-164.