A collection of 7 posts
What realists like Emma Ashford deride as America’s “reactionary defence of the status quo” is in fact a prudent effort to preserve a world order of unparalleled value.
Realists may believe international relations is all about mindless forces balancing and smashing into each other, but it’s actually about ideology, institutions, history, and the personalities of human beings.
In its cold materialist outlook, Realism fails to recognize that every nation has a unique set of interests shaped by its own history, geography, and beliefs.
Moral relativism, and its equally dubious corollary of moral equivalence, too often mars contemporary Realists’ conceptions of political realities.
What John J. Mearsheimer gets wrong about Ukraine, international affairs, and much else besides.
I see very little promise in grounding a moral realism (insofar as such a thing is ultimately a viable project) in terms of evolutionary fitness, and much more promise is taking Harris’ tack.
Just as it is unfair to compare idealised socialism to a realistic but flawed capitalism, so too is it unfair for Brook to compare his idealised capitalist vision to realistic socialism.