This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Of all the authors mentioned in the article who were born after 1700 there isn't a single one who is not American or British. You'd think due to the nature of the topic there'd be a bunch of realists outside of the US (in the former Soviet Union, in China, in modern Russia), but alas the article avoids talking about them ALLTOGETHER Openlydialectic ( talk) 17:12, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Addressed concerns by adding contemporary authors and politicians from France, Russia, Japan, and China — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.169.89 ( talk) 03:27, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
How did this particular approach to international relations come to be called "realism"? The name suggests that it is the correct approach to international relations, based on the actual, factually-correct understanding of players' motivations and goals. But of course, every other approach to international relations presumably takes a similar view. So presumably someone (presumably a "realist" wanting to make their theory harder to challenge) decided on this name, and others went along with it. I think that this deserves at least a mention in the History section. Iapetus ( talk) 16:49, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Critically evaluate the realistic theory in international Relation 116.206.222.163 ( talk) 12:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Of all the authors mentioned in the article who were born after 1700 there isn't a single one who is not American or British. You'd think due to the nature of the topic there'd be a bunch of realists outside of the US (in the former Soviet Union, in China, in modern Russia), but alas the article avoids talking about them ALLTOGETHER Openlydialectic ( talk) 17:12, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Addressed concerns by adding contemporary authors and politicians from France, Russia, Japan, and China — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.169.89 ( talk) 03:27, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
How did this particular approach to international relations come to be called "realism"? The name suggests that it is the correct approach to international relations, based on the actual, factually-correct understanding of players' motivations and goals. But of course, every other approach to international relations presumably takes a similar view. So presumably someone (presumably a "realist" wanting to make their theory harder to challenge) decided on this name, and others went along with it. I think that this deserves at least a mention in the History section. Iapetus ( talk) 16:49, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Critically evaluate the realistic theory in international Relation 116.206.222.163 ( talk) 12:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)