I did a lengthy interview with The Institute of Art and Ideas in London on 6 November 2023, which was recently posted on YouTube. The interviewer asks probing questions about how I think the world works. In addition to asking questions about specific cases like the Ukraine war, he asks question about the value of realist theory for understanding international relations.
97 Comments
95 more comments...No posts
If anything, state actors use ideological rhetoric and other types of alternatives as a way to gain support for their objectives. Perhaps these 'irrational' wars were driven by the state actor, as a result of internal conflicts. If you were to argue the wars the US had fought were irrational, you ought to question why the state actor had behaved that way. Perhaps, you could argue from a rational irrationality perspective: the state actor had been indeed rational, holding and maintaining an irrational position, as it was instrumentally useful to signal strength and as a way to garner public support within the nation-state. You could simply just go back and say, another instance of state irrationality. That very well could be, but it's a lazy explanation.
The problem with calling a video "How the world works" is that exceptions to how it works weaken the predictive power of the theory.
If you then criticise how part of it works - the USA shouldn't be focusing on Ukraine, says John here - then you contradict your own theory that Great Powers (and states in general) are rational.
When you then blame the USA and NATO for causing the war, you've either got your history badly the wrong way around, or you've thrown your Great Powers book in the bin. I would argue he has done both.
Great thinkers have thrown their books in the bin before - witness Wittgenstein trashing his Tractatus. John's error is two-fold: first he forgets that his book has the word "Tragedy" in it - Great Powers can't help but defeat themselves eventually - he clearly argues here that the USA and NATO are not acting rationally; and because his theory has holes (structural theories cannot account for Agency; cause and effect are confused; the Domestic Determinant and the Constructivist complexity of decision-making are ignored), his policy advice comes over as just another opinion on social media, however trenchant, articulate, and enjoyably controversial!