send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Read the passage below and answer the following questions. The classical realist theory of international relations has long dominated both academic institutions and the American government. Even at the birth of the nation, early political thinkers, such as Alexander Hamilton, promoted a realist view of international relations and sought to influence the actions of the government based on this perspective. While the classical realist school of international relations is not entirely homogeneous in nature, there are certain premises that all classical realists share. The primary principle underlying classical realism is a concern with issues of war and peace. Specifically, classical realists ask, what are the causes of war and what are the conditions of peace? The members of the classical realist school mainly attribute war and conflict to what is termed the security dilemma. In the absence of any prevailing global authority, each nation is required to address its own security needs. However, each nation’s quest for security—through military build-ups, alliances, or territorial defences—necessarily unsettles other nations. These nations react to feelings of insecurity by engaging in their own aggressive actions, which leads other nations to react similarly, perpetuating the cycle. It is important to note that for realists, unlike idealists or liberal internationalists, international conflict is a necessary consequence of the structural anarchy that nations find themselves in. Whereas other schools may see international conflict as the result of evil dictators, historical chance, flawed socio-political systems, or ignorance of world affairs, classical realists see war as the logical result of a system that by its nature lacks a true central authority. Hand in hand with this view of conflict as an inevitable condition of the global power structure is the realists’ view of the nation as a unitary actor. Because classical realists see international relations as a continuing struggle for dominance, the nation cannot be viewed as a collection of individuals with disparate wants, goals, and ideologies. The realist view requires the formulation of a national interest, which in its simplest terms refers to the nation’s ability to survive, maintain its security, and achieve some level of power relative to its competitors. Realism is not without its critics, many of whom challenge the premise that war is the natural condition of international relations or that there can be a truly national interest. However, the realist school of international relations continues to shape foreign policy because of the successes it has had in describing real world interactions between nations.
The author most likely regards the classical realist theory of international relations with
General lack of interest
Unconvinced dismissal
Indirect disapproval
Experienced acceptance
- Option 1: General lack of interest
- Implies the author is indifferent to the topic.
- The passage contains detailed analysis, indicating active engagement.
- Option 2: Unconvinced dismissal
- Suggests the author has doubts and outright dismisses realism.
- Despite acknowledging criticisms, the text does not dismiss realism and even notes its successes.
- Option 3: Indirect disapproval
- Indicates subtle critique without overt rejection.
- The passage mentions criticisms but also respects realism’s influence and historical significance.
- Option 4: Experienced acceptance
- Signifies knowledgeable acknowledgment of realism’s impact.
- The author provides an informed discussion, recognizing realism’s role in shaping policy.
Correct Answer: Option 4: Experienced acceptance
The author acknowledges criticism but describes the theory’s influential role in international relations.
By: Munesh Kumari ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses