POLS 103 Midterm

0.0(0)
Studied by 0 people
call kaiCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/36

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Last updated 10:07 AM on 10/5/26
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced
Call with Kai
Chat

No analytics yet

Send a link to your students to track their progress

37 Terms

1
New cards

State

An inhabited territorial entity controlled by a government that exercises sovereignty over a territory. Must have a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.

2
New cards

Sovereignty

A state’s right, at least in principle, to do whatever it wants within its own territory; most important international norm. In other words, one state should not have any control over another state’s domestic affairs.

  • Custom, not legal right

  • Emerged out of Treaty of Westphalia (1648)


3
New cards

Anarchy

A term that implies not complete chaos but the lack of a central government that can enforce rules OR an absence of ultimate political authority to solve disputes, allocate resources, or enforce agreements. Collective action problem stems from it.

4
New cards

Levels of Analysis


  • Individual (political elites) - constructivism

  • Domestic (what happens within a state) - liberal internationalism

  • Systemic (system of international politics itself; has to do with more abstract concepts like distribution of goods and power) - realism, liberal institutionalism


5
New cards

Unitary Actor Assumption

Realist assumption that the actor (usually a state) exercising power is a single entity that can “think” about its actions coherently and make choices. Internal divisions (leaders, bureaucracies, public opinion, parties) are ignored.

6
New cards

Distribution of Power

  • Multipolarity

    • International system is made up of sovereign states with equal power 

    • Least stable of the three

  • Bipolarity

    • System with two dominant powers or blocks of alliances

    • Uncertain stability

  • Unipolarity

    • System with one dominant power or hegemony

    • Most stable according to realists  


7
New cards

Power

Definition

The ability to get another actor to do what it would not otherwise have done.

8
New cards

Measures of Power

X can be measured in terms of:

  • GDP

  • Military capabilities

  • Military allies (stronger state backing weaker state may make the latter powerful)

  • Human Resources (population, education, skills, etc.) 

  • Natural resources (latent power; e.g., OPEC)

  • Geography (strategic position; e.g., Iran and the Strait of Hormuz) 


9
New cards

How each school of thought defines power

  • Realism: Material power 

    • GDP; military forces; natural resources 

    • “Dominance”

  • Liberalism: Agenda setting

    • Setting rules; constraining decisions 

    • “Reciprocity” 

  • Constructivism: Social power

    • Soft power; ability to persuade 

    • “Identity” 


10
New cards

The Rationality Assumption

Assumption that states behave as rational actors in their efforts to influence others; implies that states and other international actors act in ways that advance their interests without regard for other actors’ sovereignty.

11
New cards

Causes of WWI

  • Assassination of Franz Ferdinand

  • Cult of the Offensive (a belief in the advantage of using force offensively)

  • Alliances and belief in Bandwagoning 

  • Competition over colonies 


12
New cards

Game Theory

A branch of mathematics concerned with predicting bargaining outcomes. Aims to deduce likely outcomes, given players’ preferences and the possible moves open to them.

13
New cards

The Prisoner’s Dilemma

A game that captures the kind of collective goods problem common to IR. In this situation, rational players choose moves that produce an outcome in which all players are worse off than under a different set of moves.

14
New cards

Game of Chicken

This game sheds light on the concept of deterrence, which involves convincing another actor not to take an action it otherwise would.

15
New cards

Public Goods

Definition

A tangible or intangible good, created by members of a group, that is available to all group members regardless of their individual contributions

Are both:

  • Non-rival (your use of the good doesn’t prevent others from using the good)

  • Non-excludable (you cannot feasibly exclude others from the good) 


16
New cards

Free Rider Problem

  • Problem in which one can’t be prevented from consuming a public good, even if one doesn’t contribute to its production 

  • Therefore, all individuals have an incentive to underperform 

  • Leads to overall underproduction of the public good


17
New cards

Collective Action

The provision of public goods through the cooperation of two or more actors.

18
New cards

Solutions to Collective Action Problem

  • Enforce rules for contribution

    • Dominance

  • Make it profitable to contribute and costly to cheat

    • Reciprocity

  • Persuade actors to be more willing to contribute 

    • Identity


19
New cards

Key Realist Thinkers

  • Sun Tzu

  • Thucydides

  • Machiavelli

  • Hobbes


20
New cards

Realist Assumptions

  • Assumes that every state desires and pursues power

  • Assumes that states are unitary actors, meaning that everyone within a state is united in their preferences regarding interactions with other states

  • Assumes rationality, meaning states are always in strict pursuit of self interest and do not care about the sovereignty of other states

  • Assumption of anarchy, meaning that there is no state willing to protect another state’s sovereignty and no central government to enforce norms

  • Pessimistic view of the collective action problem; prefer a strategy of dominance


21
New cards

Realist Critique of Liberalism

Critique of Liberal Internationalism:

  • Democracy is often not peaceful

    • Publics are fickle—what if they demand war?

    • Publics can be riled up for war

  • Democratic publics do not necessarily constrain

    • Publics and legislatures do not always serve as meaningful constraints on power politics

Critique of Liberal Institutionalism:

  • The Power in Institutions Critique

    • Institutions are common and may be even powerful, but they represent the interests of great powers

  • The Relative Gains Critique

    • Absolute (liberal) vs. Relative (realist) Gains — which do states care most about?


22
New cards

The Security Dilemma

A state’s actions to increase its own security can be perceived as threatening by others 

23
New cards

Deterrence

  • Based on an assumption of rationality

    • I think my rival is rational and therefore I believe it likely or at least hope that they will leave my country alone

  • A strategy of persuading the adversary that the costs of an action will outweigh the benefits

  • Win by:

    • Manipulate cost through threats


24
New cards

Liberal Institutionalism

Facet of liberal theory in which emphasis is placed on international institutions and their agenda-setting power.

25
New cards

Liberal Internationalism

Facet of liberal theory in which emphasis is placed on domestic institutions. Assumes that, if we have enough domestic institutions that can keep leaders following rules, the world will be a more peaceful place.

26
New cards

Democratic Peace Theory

The proposition, first argued by Kant and strongly supported by empirical evidence, that democracies almost never fight wars against each other (although they do fight against authoritarian states).

  • Key element of Liberal Internationalism

  • Liberal Internationalisms argue the reason for this proposition is rooted in public opinion (in democracies, most people dislike war)

  • Constructivists would take a more social approach: democracies are friends with one another and therefore do not fight


27
New cards

Constructivism

A movement in IR theory that examines how changing international norms and actors’ identities help shape the content of state interests. Asks how states define their interests through interactions with one another and aims to explain preferences where Realism and Liberalism merely assume their existence.

28
New cards

Social Theories

A set of theories that seek to explain preferences and behaviors in terms of social interaction.

  • Preferences are not seen as inherent or natural

  • Focus on meaning, values, and ideas


29
New cards

Social Facts

“Things like money, sovereignty, rights, which have no material reality but exist only because people collectively believe they exist and act accordingly.” - Finnemore & Sikkink

30
New cards

Norms

A principle of right action binding upon the members of a group and serving to guide, control, or regulate proper and acceptable behavior. Constructivists believe this informal institution shapes state preferences and will help solve the Collective Action Problem.

31
New cards

Taboos

Very strong social prohibitions against an action (e.g., sovereignty violation, use of chemical weapons).

32
New cards

Logic of Consequences

State behavior is shaped by rational calculation.

  • Favored by Realist and Liberal thinkers


33
New cards

Logic of Appropriateness

State behavior is shaped by what is morally or socially correct (i.e., norms).

  • Favored by Constructivist thinkers


34
New cards

Norm Enforcement

  • In domestic politics, laws play a large role in this practice

  • In international relations, social criticism is used to hold other states accountable for their violations

  • “Naming and Shaming”


35
New cards

Gender Theories

Research approaches that challenge the hidden gendered assumptions of international relations as a field.

36
New cards

Difference Feminism

Claims that real differences exist between men and women. This results in differing outcomes for men and women in positions of leadership. For example, views women as more cooperative and less warlike.

37
New cards

Liberal Feminism

Claims that no real social differences exist between men and women—that the sexes are equal in every respect but biology. Therefore, outcomes are no different whether a man or a woman is in leadership. Also argues women are excluded from leadership because of sexism.