Reclaiming the critical dimension of realism: Hans J. Morgenthau on the ethics of scholarship

Review of International Studies

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 5-27

  Cozette, Murielle ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 38149044039     PISSN: 02602105     EISSN: 14699044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0260210508007882     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. Morgenthau, quoted in Christoph Frei, Hans J. Morgenrhau - An Intellectual Biography (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana University Press, 2001), p. 158.
2. Robert L. Rothstein, 'On the Costs of Realism', Political Science Quarterly, 87:3 (1972), p. 359.
3. Robert Cox, 'Social Forces, States and World Orders', in R. Keohane (ed.), Neorealism and its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), p. 211. Later, Cox acknowledges that talking about realism without distinguishing between Morgenthau and Waltz is problematic, and simply makes it clear that his main target is Waltz.
4. Ibid., p. 208.
5. Ibid., p. 209.
6. Ibid., p. 212.
7. Ibid., p. 210.
8. Ibid., p. 210.
9. Robert Cox, with Tim Sinclair, Approaches to World Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 505.
10. Richard Ashley, 'The Poverty of Neorealism', International Organization, 38:2 (1984), p. 281.
11. While the article concentrates on Morgenthau's views about the relation between truth and power, it does not pretend to undertake an in-depth analysis of the concept of Truth itself. Nor does it address how one can reach truth - this would deserve another article. These two issues are not directly relevant for the purpose of the article, which is to demonstrate that one cannot decently argue that realism has no critical dimension and is a conservative theory in the sense that it would reinforce the existing order.
12. Hans Morgenthau, 'Thought and Action in Polities', Social Research, 38:4 (1971), p. 143.
13. Hans Morgenthau, Science: Servant or Master? (New York: New American Library, 1972), p. 7: 'science that is undertaken for its own sake and exclusively for the purpose of knowing complies with the ideal of science, and the scientific enquiry is the closer to this ideal the more it is indifferent to purpose and free from function, which are alien to the pure purpose of knowing'.
14. Morgenthau, Science: Servant or Master?, p. 14.
15. Hans Morgenthau, 'The Great Betrayal' (1959), in Hans Morgenthau, The Purpose of American Politics (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1960), p. 342.
16. Ibid., p. 355.
17. Even though truth and power constitutes two different and incommensurable spheres, they nonetheless entertain a complex relationship as they are also 'potentially intertwined'. This is because power has an interest in truth, and in turn the conditions of the search for truth may be affected by power. See Science: Servant or Master?, p. 14.
18. Ibid., p. 14.
19. Ibid., p. 15. It is worth noting that this highlights an important ambiguity that Morgenthau never really managed to solve: indeed, while arguing that scholars must unmask power for what it is, he also asserts that power needs to be effective, and therefore requires a certain amount of secrecy. This is particularly clearly expressed in Morgenthau's views on diplomacy. I am indebted to Prof. Richard Ned Lebow for pointing this out during our conversations.
20. Hans Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations. The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1985), p. 101.
21. Quoted in Sean Molloy, 'Truth, Power, Theory: Hans Morgenthau's Formulation of Realism', Diplomacy and Statescraft, 15:1 (2004), p. 8.
22. See also Frei, Hans J. Morgenthau, p. 204, on the normative side of Morgenthau's writings.
23. Hans Morgenthau, Truth and Power. Essays of a Decade 1960-1970 (London: Pall Mall, 1970), p. 15.
24. See Julien Benda, La Trahison des Clercs (Paris: Grasset, 1975), p. 121.
25. This issue has been the subject of a discussion between Wallace, who clearly argues along Morgenthau's ideas that scholars should adopt an attitude of 'semi detachment' toward politics, and Booth and Smith who challenge his conception of truth and power. See William Wallace, 'Truth and Power, Monks and Technocrats: Theory and Practice in International Relations, Review of International Studies, 22:3 (1996), pp. 301-23;
26. Ken Booth, 'A Reply to Wallace', Review of International Studies, 23:3 (1997), pp. 371-7;
27. Steve Smith, 'Power and Truth: A Reply to William Wallace', Review of International Studies, 23:4 (October 1997), pp. 507-16.
28. See for example Michael Joseph Smith, 'Hans Morgenthau and the American National Interest in the Early Cold War', Social Research (Winter 1981), p. 766.
29. Hans Morgenthau, 'The Purpose of Political Science', in James C. Charlesworth (ed.), A Design for Political Science: Scope, Objectives and Methods (Philadelphia, PA: The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1966), p. 79.
30. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 259.
31. Morgenthau, The Purpose of Political Science', p. 77.
32. See Kenneth Thompson, 'Introduction', in Hans Morgenthau, In Defense of the National Interest: A Critical Examination of American Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1982), p. iv.
33. See also Frei, Hans J Morgenthau, p. 211.
34. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 257.
35. Ibid., p. 9.
36. See for example Krause, Keith, Williams, Michael (eds.), Critical Security Studies: Concepts and Cases, p. xii: '.. . critical theory takes the question of change at its foundation, in both an explanatory and an evaluative sense'.
37. Morgenthau, Science: Servant or Master?, p. 11.
38. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 15.
39. Ibid., p. 15.
40. Morgenthau, 'The Purpose of Political Science', p. 72. Morgenthau personally experienced this under Johnson. See George Eckstein, 'Hans Morgenthau: A Personal Memoir', Social Research (Winter 1981), p. 650.
41. See also Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 22.
42. Morgenthau, 'The Purpose of Political Science', p. 71.
43. Ibid., p. 73.
44. Ibid., p. 73.
45. I am grateful to Professor Richard Ned Lebow for bringing this point to my attention.
46. 'The Wizard of Quiz', Time Magazine, 11 February 1957, available at: 〈http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,809055,00.html〉.
47. Morgenthau, 'The Great Betrayal', in The Purpose of American Politics, p. 343.
48. Ibid., p. 344.
49. Ibid., p. 344.
50. Ibid., pp. 352-3.
51. It is worth noting that such conception is not so different from that of 'post-structuralist' approaches, which emphasise a posture of 'dissidence' as characteristic of their theoretical stance. While the meaning these approaches ascribe to the word dissidence may differ from Morgenthau's understanding of the term, what they both share is a commitment to 'stir up the conscience of society' as Morgenthau puts it. It should therefore be more clearly acknowledged that realism advocates dissidence from the powers-that-be, and that such a posture is in fact intrinsic to realist scholarship as defined by Morgenthau.
52. Richard Falk, 'Hans Morgenthau on Two Wars of America in Vietnam and Iraq', in G. O. Mazur (ed.), One Hundred Year Commemoration to the Life of Hans Morgenthau (1904-2004) (New York: Semeneko Foundation, 2004), p. 28.
53. Ibid., p. 31.
54. Ibid., p. 24.
55. Michael Cox, 'Hans J Morgenthau, Realism and the Rise and Fall of the Cold War', 47th Annual International Studies Association, San Diego, 23-25 March 2006, p. 24.
56. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 23. See also p. 22.
57. Hans Morgenthau, Vietnam and the United States (Washington: Public Affairs Press, 1965), p. 20.
58. Morgenthau, In Defense of the National Interest, p. 89.
59. Kennan echoes Morgenthau: 'Our diplomacy can never be stronger than the impression we contrive to create on others, not just by virtue of what we do but rather - and even more importantly - by what we are'. Quoted in John Coffey, Political Realism in American Thought (London: Associated University Press, 1977), p. 60.
60. Morgenthau, 'The Purpose of Political Science', p. 72.
61. Hans Morgenthau, Scientific Man Versus Power Politics (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1946), p. 197.
62. Morgenthau quoted in Greg Russell, Hans J. Morgenthau and the Ethics of American Statecraft (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana University Press, 1990), p. 60.
63. For a very good overview of Morgenthau's stance on values, see Frei, Morgenthau, pp. 145-77, where Frei notably shows how Morgenthau argued for the necessity to defend some values, especially when confronted with Nazism in Germany.
64. Morgenthau, quoted in Russell, Morgenthau, p. 209.
65. Morgenthau, quoted in Frei, Morgenhau, p. 167.
66. Morgenthau, quoted ibid., p. 172.
67. Morgenthau (personal letter), quoted ibid., p. 216.
68. Morgenthau, quoted in Russell, Morgenthau, p. 162.
69. Morgenthau, 'The Political Science of E. H. Carr', World Politics, 1 (October 1948-July 1949), p. 134.
70. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 260.
71. See also Hans Morgenthau, 'The Fallacy of Thinking Conventionally about Nuclear Weapons', in David Carlton and Carlo Schaerf (eds.), Arms Control and Technological Innovation (London: Groom Helm, 1977), p. 255.
72. Morgenthau, 'Fallacy', p. 264.
73. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 260.
74. Ibid., p. 261.
75. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, p. 10.
76. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 26.
77. Ibid., p. 17.
78. Ibid., p. 18.
79. Morgenthau, Science, Servant or Master?, p. 14.
80. Ibid., p. 50-1.
81. Hans Morgenthau, 'Politics and Political Science', in Anthony Lang (ed.), Political Theory and International Affairs: Hans J. Morgenthau on Aristotle's The Politics (Westport, London: Praeger, 2004), p. 24.
82. Morgenthau, 'Truth and Power, p. 246.
83. Ibid., p. 247.
84. Morgenthau, Science, Servant or Master?, p. 20.
85. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 247.
86. Morgenthau, Science: Servant or Master?, p. 20.
87. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, p. 261.
88. Ibid., p. 22.
89. The title of the heading is adapted from Booth's chapter 'Dare Not to Know: IR Theory versus the Future', in Ken Booth and Steve Smith (eds.), International Relations Theory Today (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995, pp. 328-51.
90. See for example Mark Hoffman, 'Critical Theory and the Inter-Paradigm Debate', Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 16:2 (1987), p. 233.
91. Morgenthau, Science, Servant or Master?, p. 29.
92. Ibid., p. 16.
93. Cox, 'States, Social Forces and World Orders', p. 207.
94. Morgenthau, 'Thought and Action in Polities', p. 161.
95. See Ken Booth, 'Dare Not to Know: IR Theory versus the Future', in International Relations Theory Today (Cambridge: Polity, 1995), p. 330. 'The implications of saying "dare not to know" in international relations are profound. They entail a revolution in the ontology, epistemology and agenda of the discipline. Dare not to know means: re-examining basic concepts; opening up what has been closed out; re-humanising what has been dehumanised, de-gendering what has been gendered; celebrating confusion rather than certainty; dethroning the logic of anarchy with the logics of anarchy; denaturalising established common sense; populating the frontier zones between International Relations and other academic disciplines; ideologising the supposedly 'objective'; re-imagining the humanly constituted; contextualising the tradition; making normativity a norm, and listening carefully to the subject's screaming silences.' Morgenthau would certainly agree with many of Booth's suggestions, but he would fundamentally oppose his claim to 'dare not to know', and his injunction to 'celebrate confusion'.
96. Morgenthau, Science, Servant or Master?, p. 72.
97. See Christian Reus-Smit, The Constructivist Turn: Critical Theory After the Cold War. ANU: Working Paper no. 1996/4 (August 1996), p. 3, where Reus-Smit summarises the main characteristics of the two main variants of critical theory, namely modern approaches, which rely on 'critical interpretivism' and accept 'a posture of minimal foundationalism', and postmodern ones, which radically reject any idea of foundation and adopt 'radical interpretivism'.
98. John Mearsheimer, 'E. H. Carr vs Idealism: The Battle Rages On', International Relations, 19:2 (2005), p. 146.
99. Ibid., p. 147.
100. I am grateful to Véronique Pin-Fat for pointing that out in our conversations.