No theory is perfect. The impressive design, by Tom Piper, comprises two very tall ladders, and . To the extent that cultural group selection extends back into our evolutionary past, cultural traits have not been consistently or powerfully contrary to the evolved traits of egoism, dominance, and ingroup/outgroup bias. Although Mearsheimer recognized war as a legitimate instrument of statecraft, he did not believe that it was always justified. On the contrary, it provides or adds to the reasons why we demand and need them, and indeed why they are so hard to establish and maintain. The environment in which we evolved typically implies the Pleistocene era, lasting from 2 million years ago until around 10,000 years ago. In 2007 Mearsheimer coauthored with Stephen M. Walt a best-selling but highly controversial book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007). Note that we do not intend to make the full case forthe role of evolution in human behavior. Mearsheimer's theory operates on five core assumptions. These strategies are not unique to humans and, in fact, characterize a much broader trend in behavior among mammals as a wholeespecially primatesas well as many other major vertebrate groups, including birds, fish, and reptiles. While this may be true in western, industrialized . Reckless States and Realism John J. Mearsheimer Abstract Kenneth Waltz opted to reject the rational actor assumption in developing his theory of international politics. Destined for War gets its Thucydides wrong, but its intentionsto warn that China and the US are on course to stumble into an unwanted warare noble. We do not assume that humans and our primate cousins simply inherited these traits wholesale from a common ancestor. In human history and prehistory, other human groups were commonly the most dangerous threat in the environment, and the ingroup/outgroup bias is likely to have helped the ingroup remain cohesive, avoid and be wary of outgroups, solve the collective action problem in emergencies, and kill outsiders.136,137,Reference Tooby, Cosmides and Hgh-Olesen138, Second, the ingroup/outgroup bias offers a rapid heuristic to weigh the various threats when encountering other humans. Mearsheimer's World Glenn H. Snyder Offensive Realism and the Struggle First, as with other realist theories, Mearsheimer assumes that the . Rather, chimpanzees appear to have evolved an innate aggression toward other groups, a tendency that causes them to attack neighboring males when the opportunity arises, and leads to greater Darwinian reproductive success over time. On the contrary, it is famously hard to initiate and maintain from both a theoretical and empirical perspective, which is why this topic continues to fill huge volumes of scholarly literature in economics and political science.208,209 As we have emphasized, cooperation is easy to explain where it brings clear mutual benefits to the self-interest of those involved, such as trade or military alliances (in which case offensive realism is as good an explanation of cooperation as any other theory). As we would expect, this leads to sex differences in the desire for status. Heis the author of Darwin and International Relations: On the EvolutionaryOrigins of War and Ethnic Conflict (University Press of Kentucky, 2004). A caveat to this prediction is that women in power may tend to act like men, either because selection effects trump stereotypical sex differences (female leaders may have personalities similar to male leaders), or because egoism and dominance are necessary traits in order to survive in the system of international anarchy (or on Capitol Hill).Reference Fukuyama197,Reference Clift and Brazaitis198. Mearsheimer outlines five assumptions or premises comprising his theoretical . Note: In all cases, we argue, holding onto the status quo is not always good enough to ensure survival. As with all things in nature, dominance hierarchies vary considerably. For Mearsheimer, states seek to maximize power not because they are aggressive, but because the system requires itthis behavior is the best way to maximize security in an anarchic world. Table4. This parallels the primatologists argument that the efforts of chimpanzees to seek territorial expansion and as much power as possible represents an adaptive strategy to ensure survival and promote the success of future generations. Hostname: page-component-75b8448494-spc8s Based on these findings, we hypothesize that states behave as offensive realists predict not just because of anarchy in the modern international system but also because of the legacy of our evolution. Retaliation and collaboration among humans, Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations, Evolutionary biology: Struggling to escape exclusively individual selection, Reintroducing group selection to the human behavioural sciences, The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts and the Origins of Cooperation, Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution, The United States of Ambition: Politicians, Power and the Pursuit of Office, Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes, Selected: Why Some People Lead, Why Others Follow, and Why It Matters, Presidential Ambition: Gaining Power at Any Cost, Women and the evolution of world politics, Madam President: Women Blazing the Leadership Trail, Misperception and the causes of war: Theoretical linkages and analytical problems, Aggression and the self: High self-esteem, low self-control, and ego threat, Human Aggression: Theories, Research, and Implications for Social Policy, Victims of Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, Collective violence: comparisons between youths and chimpanzees. Evolutionary theory explains why humans are egoistic, strive to dominate others, and make ingroup/outgroup distinctions. However, we argue that offensive realists need not depend on the anarchy of the state system to advance their argument. He received a D.Phil. Clearly, when it comes to the many distinctive physiological and behavioral changes humans have undergone, ecology has been as or more important than phylogeny (hence, the field of evolutionary anthropology focuses on hunter-gatherer analogues, not nonhuman primate analogues). Note that we did not pick the traits of egoism, dominance, and ingroup/outgroup bias out of a hat. Indeed, it is at these vast scales where our evolved dispositions can have their greatest and most dangerous effects. Indeed, the possibility of even more intense security competition in the Sino-American relationship, between India and Pakistan, and in the Middle East highlights the importance of making the theorys logic explicit and revealing and testing its foundations. Anarchy allows Waltz to argue that states must behave much the way Morgenthau expected, but for different reasons. Note: The unit of analysis varies among the theories (states for defensive and offensive realism, humans for classical realism and human evolution), but all predictions are for state behavior. Until recently, international relations theorists rarely used insights from the life sciences to inform their understanding of human behavior. Despite realisms long history as a theory of international politics and its widespread use by scholars and policymakers such as E.H. Carr, George Kennan, Henry Kissinger, and Hans Morgenthau, the traditional realist argument rests on weak foundations. Thus far, we have emphasized a state of anarchy in evolutionary history, in which there was no overarching power to provide protection from predators, rivals, or other threats. (PDF) The Rational Actor Assumption in Structural Realism - ResearchGate A states elitesits captains of industry and media and its military and political leadersmay be more likely than average to show these traits in abundance for five reasons. An article adapted from the book had previously been published by Foreign Affairs. He is the author of Overconfidence and War: The Havoc and Glory of Positive Illusions (Harvard University Press, 2004), which argues that common psychological biases to maintain overly positive images of our capabilities, our control over events, and the future play a key roles in causing war, and, with Dominic Tierney, Failing to Win: Perceptions of Victory and Defeat in International Politics (Harvard University Press, 2006), which examines how and why popular misperceptions commonly create undeserved victories or defeats in wars and crises. In Matt Ridleys words, to prefer group selection over individual selection is to prefer genocide over murder.Reference Ridley188 Group selection can promote cooperation and altruism, but only within the group. That is, there is no ultimate authority in international politics comparable to a domestic government that can adjudicate disputes and provide protection for citizens.Reference Waltz25,Reference Waltz26 Without governmental authority, Waltz argues, the international system is a self-help system, where states must provide for their own protection through arms and alliances. Evolutionary theory provides an important framework for understanding the ingroup/outgroup distinction commonly noted by anthropologists, sociologists, and political scientists, and perhaps most prominently by psychologists.Reference Kurzban, Neuberg and Buss120,121 Of the many biases identified in the so-called cognitive revolution in psychology, the ingroup/outgroup bias is one of most pervasive, pernicious, and powerful. The strategic allocation of resources to others often advances ones own Darwinian fitness. Dominic Johnson is professor of international relations at the University of Oxford. A recurrent criticism of any theory of international relations based on the role of individuals is why we should expect individual behavior to tell us anything about state behavior. Where a states own security is threatened or the state becomes vulnerable to exploitation, alliances offer one means of increasing or preserving power. Mearsheimer: The Tragedy of Great Power Politics As Mearsheimer and others acknowledge, power maximization may not always be a good strategy and, indeed, it has led a number of states into disaster. Offensive realism based on evolutionary theory makes the same predictions for state behavior, but the ultimate causal mechanism is different: human evolution in the anarchic, dangerous, and competitive conditions of the late-Pliocene and Pleistocene eras. Volume 1: Chimpanzees, Bonobos, and Gorillas, Natural Selection and Social Theory: Selected Papers of Robert Trivers, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Punish or perish? Conventional offensive realism cannot explain such events well. Mearsheimers offensive realism argues that states gain power to ensure security. Evolutionary theory makes three major contributions to the offensive realist theory of international politics: (1) a novel ultimate cause of the primary traits of offensive realist behavior (self-help, power maximization, and fear); (2) an extension of offensive realism to any domain in which human actors compete for power (e.g., civil war, ethnic conflict, or domestic politics); and (3) an explanation for why individual leaders themselves, not just states, behave as they do. To an observant international relations scholar, the behavior of chimpanzees is remarkably like the behavior of states predicted by the theory of offensive realism. The core idea of offensive realism is that a state most reliably ensures its security by maximizing its power. Provo Canyon School's history of abuse accusations spans decades, far Offensive Realism (Mearsheimer) Flashcards | Quizlet The recent crises of the Euro and migration have shown in stark terms that individual states continue to exploit the opportunity to free-ride on others if they can, and even the most powerful states, such as Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, have been reluctant or unwilling to make sacrifices to protect other states. The strength of dominance hierarchies in humans is debated and varies empirically, but such hierarchies are always evident in some form or other. Review: In 'Hamnet,' Shakespeare Becomes Soap Opera Our approach also suggests that if offensive realism is a product of human nature, rather than merely a consequence of international anarchy, it can be broadened to explain human conflict at many levels, from tribal warfare, ethnic conflict, and civil wars to domestic politics, commercial competition, and international relations. We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Offensive realism, a theory of international relations, holds that states are disposed to competition and conflict because they are self-interested, power maximizing, and fearful of other states. One reason why an evolutionary explanation of egoism, dominance, and ingroup/outgroup bias is useful is because alternative explanations for these empirical traits have failed. They have enjoyed an absence of competition from gorillas (bonobos only live south of the Congo River, while gorillas only live on the north side of the river), high-quality foliage for food, and dense forest, which reduced vulnerability to ambush and thus, it is thought, the utility of aggression in males.168,169 Accordingly, bonobos may not be a good model for understanding human behavior, for reasons of both phylogenetic history and shared ecology. Natural selection generates contingent behavior because it is more effective than blind aggression. At the dawn of the 21st century, an era that will be dominated by science at least as much as philosophy, we have the opportunity to move away from untested assumptions about human nature. Biology, politics, and the emerging science of human nature, Violence and Warfare among Hunter-Gatherers, Behavior, Culture, and Conflict in World Politics, Blood Is Their Argument: Warfare Among the Mae Enga Tribesmen of the New Guinea Highland, War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage, The Origins of War: Violence in Prehistory, Constant Battles: The Myth of the Peaceful, Noble Savage, Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence, Human aggression in evolutionary psychological perspective, The evolution of war: theory and controversy, Life histories, blood revenge, and warfare in a tribal population, Group competition, reproductive leveling, and the evolution of human altruism, Intergroup aggression in chimpanzees and war in nomadic hunter-gatherers: Evaluating the chimpanzee model, Warfare and reproductive success in a tribal population, The genetical evolution of social behavior. We realize international cooperation is prevalent, but that does not mean such cooperation is easy to obtain. Others are even older, such as the limbic system, hormones, and sexual dimorphism, which are shared by countless species extending across all mammals and beyond. In short, offensive realism may really be describing the nature of the human species more than the nature of the international system. Eric Labs captured this logic in his argument that, a strategy that seeks to maximize security through a maximum of relative power is the rational response to anarchy.38. Rathbun, Brian C. Mearsheimer's theory is built on five bedrock assumptions. Moreover, it argues that statesare obliged to behave this way because doing so favors survival in the international system. Conflict may seem costly to all parties involved, winners and losers alike, but what matters for natural selection is whether fighting, despite its costs, can bring net benefits to Darwinian fitness. IR Terms to remember Flashcards | Quizlet Utah's Office of Licensing, which provides oversight to youth residential treatment centers, has conducted 341 investigations in the past five years at Provo Canyon School's four campuses. | Find, read and cite all the research you . Third, the group could acquire more of the resource from outside of their territory through migration to uninhabited areas, trade, theft, or warfare.65,77,Reference Guilaine and Zammit67,Reference LeBlanc and Register68,Reference Wrangham and Peterson69,70, Although warfare is certainly costly to any member of a group who is killed or wounded, as well as in terms of the resources and time expended, it can become the sole (or least bad) choice for a group if migration is risky due to factors such as inhospitable or unproductive terrain or hostile neighboring groups, and where trade is difficult or impossible.
Montgomery Gator X Reader,
Simran Kooner Dentist,
Lippert Slide Out Fault Codes,
Articles M
