Introduction: A Genealogical Reading of Realism

R ealism continues to excite controversy and debate in International Relations (IR), generally in the form of Realism versus some other theory. To date, Realism has survived liberal, Marxist, constructivist, and poststructural challenges and continues to be at the center of discussions about the theory and practice of international politics. A less noticed trend in the debates about Realism has been the debate about its nature, about what constitutes Realism. The debates have continued almost in the absence of a knowledge of Realism, as Realism has become a cipher, a codeword, generally for opprobrium. The primary means of understanding Realism has been that of describing it in terms of a paradigm that seeks to present an essential set of core elements of which Realism is composed. Debate then centers on whether or not this paradigm of Realism is refuted, confuted, healthy, or in decline. 3 This book argues that this method of understanding Realism is flawed and obscures much of the value of Realism. The above quote from Nietzsche’s The Gay Science encapsulates the spirit of this book in that its intention is to put the history and theorization of Realism in IR on the scale again, to reinvestigate the supposedly “given” nature of this central theory of international politics. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.