From The Twenty Years’ Crisis to Theory of International Politics: a rhizomatic reading of realism

Political Revisionism: Old and New

“…International Relations has been slow to appreciate the impact of individual leaders on international politics as the 'first image' (domestic politics) (Waltz 1996) 2 was said not to matter for understanding the dynamics and causes of international security. While Waltz and his compatriots purified the analysis of international politics to the extreme even for realists (Molloy 2010), political science was too busy studying regularities and vagaries of ever more abstract domestic systems populated by political parties and regulated by political institutions and electoral systems, to realise that idiosyncratic leaders may quickly turn these into façade, if not farce (Krastev 2011;Blakely 2016 Freedom House 2018a, 2018b, 2018c. The degree has gone beyond the ability to suspend norms, expectations and rules and make them elastic to fit their own objectives rather than being constrained by them (Michaels 2017;Buckley & Myers 2018;Haberman & Rogers 2018;Freedom House 2018a, 2018b, 2018c.…”

Peace without perfection: The intersections of realist and pacifist thought

“…'Reflexive realism', which is associated with the work of Michael Williams (Williams, 2007;Williams, 2005), Ned Lebow (Lebow, 2003), William Scheuerman (Scheuerman, 2007;Scheuerman, 2011), and Vibeke Schou Tjalve (Tjalve, 2008;Tjalve and Williams, 2015), amongst others (Molloy, 2006;Molloy, 2010;Cozette, 2008b;Cozette, 2008a), is particularly valuable in this context, as it emerges out of sustained reflection on the interplay of ethics and politics that aims 'to restore classical realist principles of agency, prudence and the recognition of limitations as part of an attempt to provide a practical-ethical view of international politics' (Steele, 2007: 273). Classical…”

“…The orientation for this article, in this context, is to consider the possibility of developing a pacifist ethos that maintains an absolute rejection of the morality or legitimacy of war as a tool of statecraft by engaging in what Brett Steele (Steele, 2007) has termed a ‘reflexive realist’ approach to the problem. ‘Reflexive realism’, which is associated with the work of Michael Williams (Williams, 2005, 2007), Ned Lebow (Lebow, 2003), William Scheuerman (Scheuerman, 2007, 2011), and Vibeke Schou Tjalve (Tjalve, 2008; Tjalve and Williams, 2015), amongst others (Cozette, 2008a, 2008b; Molloy, 2006, 2010), is particularly valuable in this context, as it emerges out of sustained reflection on the interplay of ethics and politics that aims ‘to restore classical realist principles of agency, prudence and the recognition of limitations as part of an attempt to provide a practical-ethical view of international politics’ (Steele, 2007: 273). Classical realist ethics, as Felix Rösch argues, can in this context be deployed ‘for a revival of a democratic citizenship in global public spheres through the promotion of scepticism, (self)criticality and intellectual humility’ (Rösch, 2016: 82).…”

“…Seán Molloy’s ‘rhizomatic reading of Realism’ is also relevant here, as it gestures toward a body of realist theory in International Relations which ‘despite the epic history with which it is often afflicted, does not remain stable over time; rather, it mutates, shifts in nature, stabilises and destabilises. In short it acts pretty much as one would expect a rhizome to act’ (Molloy, 2010: 388). In adopting this approach, my suggestion here is not, therefore, that the ‘true’ versions of pacifism and realism are closer than we have previously suspected; rather, the intention is to engage in a creative theoretical act designed to provoke or inspire new ways of thinking about pacifism that do not fall into worn-out clichés and expectations of a fundamental idealist/realist divide on questions on war and peace.…”

Unlearning modernity: A realist method for critical international relations?

“…Since the publication of the English translation of Christoph Frei’s (2001) biography of Hans Morgenthau, classical realism has experienced a revival in International Relations (IR). Common textbook-knowledge has been challenged by demonstrating that realism and neo-realism stem from different intellectual backgrounds and pursue different political agenda, as expounded in Michael Williams’ (2005) wilful, Brent Steele’s (2007) reflexive, Seán Molloy’s (2010) rhizomatic, and William Scheuerman’s (2011) progressive readings of realism. Classical realism cannot be understood as a theory in a grand, universalistic sense because it lacks the rigid ontological premises to construct such a theory.…”