The Realist Tradition in American Public Opinion

Abstract

For more than half a century, realist scholars of international relations have maintained that their world view is inimical to the American public. For a variety of reasons-inchoate attitudes, national history, American exceptionalism-realists assert that the U.S. government pursues realist policies in spite and not because of public opinion. Indeed, most IR scholars share this "anti-realist assumption." To determine the empirical validity of the anti-realist assumption, this paper re-examines survey and experimental data on the mass public's attitudes towards foreign policy priorities and world views, the use of force, and foreign economic policy over the past three decades. The results suggest that, far from disliking realism, Americans are at least as comfortable with the logic of realpolitik as they are with liberal internationalism. The persistence of the anti-realist assumption might be due to an ironic fact: American elites are more predisposed towards liberal internationalism than the rest of the American public.

Cry Havoc: Rhetorical Mobilization and Foreign Policy Decision Making During War-threatening Crises

“…13 "Americans do appear to have a much more pragmatic sense of strategy than they are given credit for-an approach to the world that is actually 'pretty prudent' when it comes to the use of military force" (Jentleson 1992, 71). Drezner (2008) makes a similar claim. His analysis of Pew,…”

“…Like Jentleson (1992), Jentleson & Britton (1998), and Drezner (2008), Foyle (1999 also theorizes the interaction between the executive and the domestic audience during the period between preference formation and policy decision. Foyle's explanation for variation in domestic influence over decisions to employ force turns to individual-level analysis.…”

“…Either of these justifications, if the administration had chosen to foreground them, would have provided the administration's opposition ample "rhetorical materials out of which to craft a socially sustainable rebuttal" (Krebs & Jackson 2007, 42). Americans tend to be as skeptical of overseas crusades (Drezner 2008;Jentleson 1992;Jentleson & Britton 1998) as they are uninspired by dispassionate balance-of-power calculations.…”

Moral Support: How Moral Values Shape Foreign Policy Attitudes

“…For liberal idealists and constructivists, the moral foundation of public opinion, mobilized by norm entrepreneurs, opens up the possibility of positive moral action, whereas for realists, the public's moralism-especially in the United States-is one of the main reasons why foreign policymaking should be insulated from the pressures of public opinion (Morgenthau 1985). A few have questioned the existence of this ''moral majority'' in foreign policy issues (Drezner 2008;Kertzer and McGraw 2012), but it is largely accepted that American public opinion has moral underpinnings, whether for good (Wilson 1998) or for ill (Morgenthau 1951).…”

“…Those who trace the origins of liberal idealist thinking in IR note its embrace of humanitarianism and multilateralism (Drezner 2008). This way of thinking is also marked by a general resistance to MI, as liberal idealists maintain that reasoned individuals are capable of resolving their disputes peacefully.…”