The Influence Of Neorealism On The World War II

World War II-- also known as The Holocaust / The Genocide -- was the world 's second 'Great War '. World War II was much more larger in scale and more longer in duration. World War I had only lasted for four years, while World War II had lasted for six years. I find it quite interesting that contrary to popular belief; the United States did not enter World War II until 2 years after the genesis of the conflict. It was only in 1941, when the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor that the United States had entered the war. World War II started in 1939 due to Germany performing an unprovoked attack on Poland. Surprisingly, only a few months later after Germany invaded Poland; the whole European continent was at war. In 1939, the United States was not ready to go to war. In the early 20th century, the United States Army only ranked 39th in the world. Many Americans believed that the United States could not handle another global conflict right after the Great Depression. Although the United States was not 'officially ' part of the war at that time, that did not stop the United States from becoming 'unofficially ' involved.

Therefore, states must be as powerful as possible in order to decrease the chances of becoming a future victim. Defensive realists, on the other hand, believe that stabilizing factors can be put into place in order to favor the defense. These include balancing, as previously mentioned, and other factors that make conquest more costly for the aggressors. Therefore defensive realism clearly guided the adoption of the strategy of the containment of Soviet expansion.

Kenneth Waltz is a renowned international theorist who has a neorealism view. Waltz believes that nuclear weapons can be seen as a positive thing. In the book he is associated with the belief that “more may be better.” He talks about states creating their own sense of security to ward off internal and

World War II changed the outlook of American society and economy. Alan Brinkley discusses these changes in his article, World War II and American Liberalism. Brinkley discusses the events that brought on these changes, and what was the result of said changes on the American society. Before and during the war, American liberalism started to realize what its main mission was at the time.

For over 500 years of progression did a mess of positive outcomes, medicine, exploration and social advancement, yet a considerable measure of negatives happened as well, as all the more mass destruction weapons and the capacity to wipe ourselves out, However the reaction of this perfect was World War II, for instance, the world was confronting an ideology in Europe. Patriotism is the way the individuals started to end up firmly committed to their nation. It’s an immediate reason for the wars that happened in Europe from 1850 to 1950. The switch again into conservatism happened of mass murders, and casualties brought about by the different transformations for social change. The Nazi regin comes into power as Germany are drenched with corruption

The outbreak of World War II was a direct result of World War I. When World War I ended, numerous countries had political parties advocating for a totalitarian regime. Nationalism played a crucial part in the development of an authoritarian government as leaders recognized it as a tool which allowed them to unify the nation and justify their actions. Leaders like Hitler utilized this effectively. “National Socialism grew out of many complex developments, of which entail were extreme nationalism and racism.” These two ideas would resonate with Hitler all the way until the end of World War II. Hitler collectively blamed the Jews for many problems Germany were facing, such as the great economic depression that had plagued much of the world around

In the international arena, there is no hierarchical rule to keep states in line or behaved; meaning that the international system is constantly in anarchy, aka the state of nature. This lack of rule enforcement puts states in a constant state of war, in a constant state where they need to stay on guard and in a tactical advantage otherwise the safety and well being of their state will be in jeopardy. In this scenario, the state’s number one priority is to protect itself and act in its self interest when need be, despite if it would typically be deemed immoral. (Donnelly 20)

In a realist world, states have “supreme power” over its territory and population, there is an absence of a higher authority. The fact that there is no higher authority has its consequences. States become self-interested, they compete for power and security. It can lead states to continuously struggle for power “where the strong dominate the weak (Kegley, 28).” This ultimately creates a system in which each state is responsible for its own survival, making them cautious towards their neighboring states. In addition, a realist world is a self-help system; “political leaders seek to enhance national security” by building armies and forming alliances (Kegley, 28). Economic and military power are key components to a state sovereignty and to national security.

“The world the American people had tried to exclude after the First World War could not forever be kept at bay.” (The Great Depression and World War II;Kennedy, David). World War II began in the year 1939 and lasted until 1945. (history.com,Pearl Harbor) Many of the issues that arose during the Second World War was initial baggage from the First World War. The Treaty of Versailles was the reason why the First World War ended between the Allied Powers and Germany. (history.com). During this time, the United States wanted as little involvement with Europe’s controversies. Meanwhile, the United States did not know at the time that Japan was a threat to our country because of unresolved issues prior to Pearl Harbor. (history.com). The common denominator between both of our countries in this era was that we were both in financial crises. (Gilder Legrman, Institure of American History) The United States was suffering from the Great Depression and Japan was in a financial crisis. One of the reasons that the United States was not in favor of Japan was because we did not support their attacks on China. “The United States allied with China when Japan declared war on China in 1937” (Office of The Historian). “The United States responded to the aggression with a battery of economic sanctions and trade embargoes” (Pearl Harbor and the road to war, history.com). Japan was upset

Defensive theory asserts that aggressive expansion as promoted by offensive neorealists upsets the tendency of states to conform to the balance of power theory, thereby decreasing the primary objective of the state, which they argue is ensuring its security . It is very important to say that Mearsheimer is not satisfied with Waltz’s theory. Great powers are seek to maintain the security and thereby the status quo. The international system creates strong stimulus, forcing the great powers to look for opportunities to increase their own power at the expense of competitors. They are interested not only in imbalance of power, but also interested in the maximum weakening of their competitors. Every great power will seek to change the balance of forces in its

I, as a citizen, should respond to globalization to a moderate extent. Globalization affects different people in a variety of ways. As a citizen, I believe it is my duty to respond to globalization. Globalization not only affects people as individuals, but people as a whole. For example, both World War I and World War II had as big of an impact as they did because of globalization. There are both negative and positive aspects of this. Because of globalization, countries were able to get the support they needed to help fight for their side. On the contrary, this dragged more countries into the wars, and those wars have lasting effects. Through globalization, World War I has caused permanent income taxes for Canada, World War I lead to World War II, and to this day, people are still dealing with the consequences.

Despite its action of the past and it apparition on the World War II, Japan nowadays represents one of the most powerful countries in the world, and it is a clear representation of redeemed and proof that the choice of accurate decision could empower a State. Even though it is a small country, Japan is comprehensibly a demonstration that a big territory is not meaning of power, and that in fact, it has more influence in the world than most of the biggest countries. Why is it a powerful country? I will consider power as the ability to keep the relations between States and the capacity of persuade others in order to achieve the own country goals. It means the idea of having the political control over the international sphere. Taking decisions is an important factor when we want to talk about power; they are the ignition point which enables politics and institutions work. Throughout the whole history, power is closely related with military forces and hard power; however, power is also represented by the consequences of proper manage of domestic policies, not only economically, but also socially, which can influence in both regional and international level, making the country a power influence. It is considered that power is everywhere and it is not necessarily repressive, prohibitive, negative or exclusionary; it is closely related with the idea that power is also positive. The essence of soft power relies on the use of diplomacy, negotiation, communication,

In “Structural Realism...” Waltz defends his theory of Structural Realism against criticism that its tenets are no longer valid in a post-Cold War world. The international system, he writes, is still anarchic, even though that system is unipolar instead of bipolar as it was during the Cold War, and that states still seek hegemony and power. A nation 's ideals and internal factors may count for something (he posits that the US intervention after the collapse of Yugoslavia was the result of such pressures),3 but they certainly shouldn 't. States should make decisions based on the idea of maintaining their own security and maintaining a balance of power in the international system.

For Realism in particular, this criticism is primarily focused on its state-centric approach. One of Realism’s main assertions is that the states are best unit of analysis (John, 132). Critical Theorists believe that in the context of Globalization, this view is “increasingly problematic” (Beck, 463). According to Ulrich Beck, the “mistakes of the national perspective are recognizable to the extent that boundaries have become permeable and interdependences, which transcend all borders, are growing exponentially” (463). Realists continue to analyze (only) the State, despite mounting evidence that the state may not always be the most influential actor. By focusing so much on the Nation-state, and discounting the role of Globalization, Realism fails to account for large-scale transformation. In other words, Realism “is a kind of political irrealism because it neglects the possibility and reality of a second ‘Great Transformation’ of the global power game” (Beck 457). It believes that the world will stay as it currently is forever.

Neorealism or neorealism relies on the assumption that states are only interested in survival. The main actors in this perspective are great powers. These states are considered rational actors. However, one state can never be certain of the actions of other states. It is because of this structure that these states operate in a state of anarchy within the system. Due to this structure, states are always in a state of fear. This fear results from the intentions of other states. The best action for a state that wants security is for the state become more powerful. The stronger, and more powerful a state becomes relative to other states, it reduces the likelihood of a conflict. This is in the relative senses, not absolute. Thus states will always be looking to exploit opportunities