How realists versus liberals versus marxists versus constructivists think of war in the international system

Realists, Liberals, Marxists, and Constructivists all have different views on war in the international system.

1. Realists: Realists believe that war is inevitable in an international system. They argue that states are the primary actors in international relations and that all states are self-interested. They believe that states are in a constant struggle for power and that war is a natural outcome of this struggle. Realists also believe that the international system is anarchic, meaning there is no overarching authority to prevent war.

2. Liberals: Liberals, on the other hand, believe that war can be avoided through international institutions and cooperation. They argue that democracy, trade, and international organizations can create a peaceful world order. Liberals believe that states are not the only important actors in international relations, but also international institutions, non-governmental organizations, and multinational corporations.

3. Marxists: Marxists view war as a result of capitalism and imperialism. They argue that the capitalist system leads to economic inequalities, which in turn lead to conflicts and wars. Marxists believe that war can be eliminated through a global class revolution that overthrows the capitalist system.

4. Constructivists: Constructivists believe that war is not inevitable and that it is a social construct. They argue that the ideas, beliefs, and identities of states and individuals play a crucial role in shaping their actions and the international system. Constructivists believe that if the ideas and beliefs about war change, then war can be avoided.

In conclusion, each of these theories offers a different perspective on war in the international system. Realists see it as inevitable, Liberals see it as preventable through cooperation and institutions, Marxists see it as a result of economic inequalities, and Constructivists see it as a social construct.