Defensive versus Offensive Realism Research Paper

Defensive versus Offensive Realism - Research Paper Example The main differences between offensive and defensive realism are based on variations on how they see power and how much power is enough. Defensive realism sees power as a means of attaining stability or security, while offensive realism sees power as both means and ends for political stability. Defensive realism says that states only engage in war to defend the security and stability of their power, while offensive realism asserts that states want more power per se because a state ultimately desires to be the hegemon in the system. Furthermore, offensive realism advocates offensive strategies, instead of restraint that defensive realism recommends, because only the strongest state can be secure. In addition, defensive realism asserts that, though the international system offers incentives for increasing power, strong nations should not pursue hegemony. Instead, Kenneth Waltz stressed that states should only strive for an â€Å"appropriate amount of power.† States can also do b alancing of power to preserve security, such as increasing military resources in reaction to another state that does the same. Despite balancing actions, defensive realism insists that states should only desire sufficient power for its security and stability. Offensive realism argues that balancing power is not efficient in gaining or preserving power; states should start or engage in wars to balance power proactively. John Mearsheimer further asserted that states could aspire for regional hegemony and not global hegemony.

Shakespeare-How would Machiavelli (or a Machiavellian) understand the Essay

Shakespeare-How would Machiavelli (or a Machiavellian) understand the character of Volumnia in Coriolanus Would he approve or disapprove of her behavior in the play Why - Essay Example The philosophy of Machiavelli has a great deal to day about deception and its use in politics. He thinks that in order to maintain power rulers have to use deception and force to move everyone in the direction they want. In this essay we will close read the play using Machiavelli and will try to answer the question whether Machiavelli would approve of Volumnia’s behavior in the play or not. This is the question we will attempt to answer. The play starts in Rome where there are riots going on because Coriolanus, the deputy of commander of the Roman army has hold grains from ordinary citizens. Coriolanus is a man who believes that ordinary people should not be given grain because they are not taking part in the military service. He is a great fighter but he has contempt for the common people. His attitude towards common people is that of an arrogant soldier. The character of Volumnia now plays an active role to make her son consul. She persuades Coriolanus to run for consul even though her son is not willing to do so. But when he couldn’t win the support of the commoners he became angry and talks badly about the plebeians. He is in turn condemned as a traitor and banished from Rome. After his exile he goes to his fierce enemy Aufidius, the commander of the Volscian army. They accept him and allow Coriolanus to lead an attack on Rome. All generals of Rome become worried and try to persuade him not to attack Rome. After all efforts are gone in vain Volumnia is sent to dissuade her son from attacking Rome. She is successful and Coriolanus spares Rome but later is killed by Aufidius for conspiracy. Volumnia is an important character of the play. She plays a great role in changing the mind of her son twice in the play and both times the outcome is in her benefit. She portrays role of a women who cannot seek power personally but tries to attain power by making her son powerful. She tried to gain power and popularity through her son Coriolanus