User:Etzan/Which International Relations Theory does your Empire follow?

Hey guys!

I've been noticing over my time on this site that different Sporewiki Empires have vastly different attitudes towards the conduct of foreign politics, though I never really gave it much thought until I started my International Relations course at University. The first thing they teach you in that class is that there are different fundamental theories and ways of thinking about international relations, most of which operate on vastly different assumptions.

So I thought I might create a fun blog this weekend examining these different approaches with as little bias as possible and seeing which Sporewiki empires fit where. Shall we begin? ^.^

What is an International Relations Theory?
In short, an international relations theory is an attempt to explain why the actors on the world stage act the way they do, whether it be individuals, corporations, governments, multinational organizations, etc. To that end, these different theories point to certain aspects of foreign relations––as there as many––and postulate that they are the most important, the driving factors in international politics.

Disclaimer: The theories as presented below appear in their purest form. The vast majority of people and political scientists subscribe to a mix of these theories, but tend to value the fundamentals of one theory over another. The same is true, I believe, for Sporewiki Empires.

Realism
Realism was the prevalent theory of international relations for the longest time. It assumes that nation-states are the most important actor in world politics, possessing the resources and authority to influence events to their liking and to solve problems when it suits their interests. To the realist, the nation-state is a rational actor which makes decisions based on its own interests and assumes that every other nation-state is doing the same. The logical result is a struggle between Machiavellian self-interested states over limited resources and influence in what is referred to as "global anarchy," since there is no effective world government or central authority.

International Liberalism
Grown out of the new global age, International Liberalism postulates that the nation-state is slowly growing obsolete, sinking into the background to make way for international bodies like the United Nations, the European Union, trans-national corporations, stateless billionaires, and organizations like the Red Cross. To the International Liberalist, this shift from nation-states to international bodies is brought about by globalism. Since nation-states are now becoming increasingly integrated into each others' economies (relying on each other for resources, production, consumption, etc), the barriers between them are slowly breaking down, making way for cooperation through bodies like the UN, EU, and NATO to resolve global issues.

Constructivism
To the Constructivist, the most important aspect of international relations is an actor's cultural identity. He postulates that every actor (individuals, nation-states, corporations, international organizations) is fundamentally shaped by the history, ideas, and ideology of the culture which created it, thereby fundamentally influencing how it acts on the world stage. Historical grudges or positive shared experiences define interactions between states, thereby making it easier or harder for two nations to get along.

Functionalism
 Functionalism takes the arguments of the International Liberal a step further. The Functionalist points to a process of integration, whereby groups of states, like the European Union, gradually give up their sovereignty in exchange for mutual protection, shared economic prosperity, and the maintenance of peace. The reason for this, the Functionalist argues, is because states can achieve so much more if they combine their resources than if they keep it all to themselves.

Sporewiki Empires
Now here is the fun part :D

Which International Relations theory does your empire most prominently abide by? Most nations are a combination of the above, but you will probably find that they derive their core assumptions about politics from one of these. Does your nation assume that every other nation is in it for themselves? Does your Empire value culture and ideology over things like relative power and standing? Comment below!