This is a part of International Political theory subject which requires a deep understanding of the theories like realism, liberalism, neo liberalism, constructivism , neo-neo debate etc..
Critically assess one of these statements: (weighs 40%)
• Pre Twentieth Century thinking about international relations was, despite all its many forms, united by an attempt to understand the human condition in a holistic way. 20th Century thinking about international relations has abandoned this approach.
• In refusing to analyse human nature as a key driver of state behaviour, Neorealism may be more scientific, but it is far less useful, than classical realism.
• The debate between neorealism and neoliberalism was the last time progress was the key aim of theoretical debate.
• In trying to offer a middle way to study international relations the English School sacrifice theoretical rigour for explanatory power.
• Cosmopolitan thought is the only morally justifiable way to investigate international politics.
• For all its ability to expose the limitations of rational choice theorising, critical theories were unable to replace that mainstream as they were never able to offer concrete answers to key questions of the discipline.
• Gendered accounts of international relations reveal the paucity of ‘mainstream' debates whilst offering no substantive way to address them.
• Constructivism sacrifices an ethical vision for world politics in favour of empirical accuracy.
• Non-western theories have revealed not only the limits, but the fundamental inadequacy, of the western theoretical tradition.
Chose anyone of the topic which will be including Introduction; explaining the key arguments in the essay with 4-5 main arguments in the main body assessing the chosen statement, a critique needs to be added after the arguments along with the conclusion.
The essay is of 4000 words with in-text and en-text referencing in harvard style.