What do you see World Order studies telling that we don’t already know from studying international theory?
EXAMPLE PROMPT DO NOT COPY
The study of world order helps fill in the gaps between what the various international relations theories such as Realism, Liberalism, Constructivism, Post-Modernism, and Feminist International Relations predict and what happens in the real world, in history. Is the world, in particular, the state of international relations becoming more orderly and accommodating to shared goals and ideals, or the opposite toward nationalism and differentiation? Or is it stagnating, not going one way or the other? Are we waiting for more comprehensive and explanatory theories, an international relations “scientific breakthrough” to provide even more insight into how the world works? Is this a worthwhile or futile effort to seek further insights and explanations? Furthermore, this study of world order reaches beyond the earlier theories to make its own predictions including at some point “History” will end. That is, as time progresses the study of the way nation-states interact with each other will provide no further insights and knowledge.Contemporary or near contemporary political scientists and theorists such as Graham Allison, Robert Cooper, Jim O’Neill, Samuel Huntington, Frank Fukuyama, and others provide their insights on the future of world order and make their own, sometimes contradicting theories of how this will all play out. Cooper attempts to structure these interactions of states by categorizing them into three groups or “barrels”, pre-modern, modern, and post-modern. However, Cooper’s attempt to explain how and why nations clash based on this categorization, though insightful and with some amount of predictive power, is still limited and far from perfect. Others such as Huntington and Fukuyama, provide their perspectives on the future of the world, one based on the clash of civilizations the other on the diminishing insertion of new ideas. In the end, no one theory or group of theories can adequately explain the wide range of behaviors and actions between states, much less between individual people. However, it is up to us as independent evaluators to try to take the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and the insights and ideas of social and political scientists to try to provide a holistic and comprehensive depiction of international relations to analyze, plan, act, and review past mistakes and push for better solutions.
