As a science, International Relations has long tried to analyze and coherently pose an explanation to the various behaviors of states in the international system, and for said purpose many theories have been developed through time. Moreover, most of the scholars that have surfaced in this sciences, have revolved around the question of “how best can the science go about explainingor understanding relations between the political communities and other significant actors that engage in politics beyond the borders of our own community, within that arena that we variously call the international society”. But there is still much criticism amongst scholars of other fields to whom IR should not be regarded as being a science, but we do have to remember that IR cannot be thoughtof being similar to other sciences such as mathematics or chemistry, simply because the facts and events that surround the international system do not possess a definitive nor scientific explanation, many causes and variables are implied in such events, therefore theories developed within the science of IR are meant to analyze these events in the best way possible and try to make out an explanationto what might have happened, in which case more than one theory or explanation might be applicable, differing from other sciences in which just one explanation for an event is necessary.
As many other sciences have had many brilliant scholars that developed said sciences through time, in the fields of IR science Edward Hallet Carr came to be one of the most prominent scholars to develop hisstudies of this science. Before Carr came to the scene of IR, the science had long tried to explain the events in the international system and how the behavior of the states in it had led to war; being the causes, effects and the prevention of war, the main focus of theories in IR. As Carr himself argues, “the science of international politics is in its infancy”, referring to such narrow focus ofstudy that the field had developed. Carr therefore develops in his book “The Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919-1939”, a broader analysis of the science and has included in it many of the different characteristics of the many theories of International Relations that have created this science as such. But even though Carr is one of the most respected IR theorists, more than seventy years have passed since thepublication of his book, and the question lies on whether his publication has any validity in the world of IR today, or as Peter Wilson puts it, “whether The Twenty Year’s Crisis would presently see much light of day”.
2. Analyzing Carr’s “ The Twenty Years’ Crisis”
a. Carr’s Importance To IR
After more than seventy years since the original publication of Carr’s book, we cannot arguethat all of the assumptions presented by the author are still valid in today’s world, but we do have to take into account that Carr’s writings are still considered one of the basic pillars for the foundation of IR as the science it has become today. Furthermore, the lack of specific or more profound explanations to world events presented by other theories such as liberalism, still validate some ofCarr’s assumptions about how the system works and how international politics are managed. Carr’s writings will still present a great importance for many years to come, even if Carr cannot be described as the sole master mind behind IR theory, he is still considered as the first scholar to ever set a clear separation of IR from other fields of study. Pier Domenico Tortola describes Carr’s work asbeing of great importance due to two reasons, “…on the one hand, it greatly contributed to the establishment of the latter (IR) as an autonomous discipline. On the other hand, this book represents one of the founding texts of classical realism”. Furthermore, Peter Wilson considers:
“The Twenty Years’ Crisis is still widely read and avidly discussed today. While it can in some respects be viewed...
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.