Rate this book

La Logica Di Potenza. L'America, Le Guerre, Il Controllo Del Mondo (2001)

by John J. Mearsheimer(Favorite Author)

3.81 of 5 Votes: 3

ISBN

8883500415 (ISBN13: 9788883500411)

languge

English

genre

History & Biography

publisher

Università Bocconi

review 1: You can't mitigate the security dilemma! Stop trying! Disregard all else and acquire all the power! Mearsheimer is the keeper of the offensive realist's flame. Just about the only guy anywhere close to the structural realism laid out by Waltz. He may violate his rationality assumption, but his writing is straightforward, easy to understand, and overall a refreshing change from the norm in today's IR great books world.
review 2: I was old enough to remember the apocalyptic prognostications of WWIII with Mad Max and Terminator movies. After fall of the Berlin Wall fell and collapse of the Soviet Union, I bought into the "End of History" euphoria. I thought that democracies have triumphed and authoritarians' days were numbered. Realism seemed too cynical and ... morepessimistic at the time. My main of objection to realism was that it didn't give enough weight to the internal traits of a state in determining its behavior. Democratic states have institutions and processes that make their governments accountable and rational (and conversely, authoritarian regimes are illegitimate, that's why they stay in power only through violence, therefore, their international relations reflect ulterior motives and irrational calculations.) Realism has a certain moral relativism that I'm uncomfortable with, but where I am in agreement is that the world is one "bad neighborhood" and all states do what they can for security. I included the outline of the notes that I took.Hat tip to Robert D. Kaplan for recommending this book.The Tragedy of Great Power Politics by John J. Mearsheimer (2001)Chapter 1. IntroductionDemocratic liberalism vs. RealismDemocratic LiberalismStates as main actorsInternal traits determine behavior“Good” states are key to world powerDemocratic peace theoryRealismStates as main actors tooThe international environment determines behaviorPower calculations dominate strategic thinkingAmericans dislike realism. Post-Cold War hopes, “End of History.”Chapter 2. Anarchy and the struggle for power Why states pursue power: a. The international system is anarchic b. Great powers have inherint offensive military potential c. States can never be sure of each other's intentions d. Survival is the primary goal of great powers e. Great powers are rational actorsMaximize relative power with rivalsStates calculate costs and risks as well as outside response before actingPower and fear a. Mutual assured destruction makes great powers feel safe b. “The stopping power of water” Bodies of water greatly reduce great power offense capability c. Balance of power between great powers determines level of fear. A multi-polar world is the most dangerous.Heirarchial state goalsNon-security goals: Ideology or humanitarian interventionWorld peace is a gamble. States are wary of collective security schemes. Modern history of international relations is full of treaties and alliances that collapsed.Chapter 3. Wealth and powerFactors that determine a state's “latent power” a. Population - Percentage of military age, percentage that can be mobilized or conscripted, how the state motivates to the public. b. Material - Access to natural resources and the ability to transform into military systems and infrastructure c. Wealth - Level of industrilization, development and trade d. Technology - Ability to develop, adapt and apply new technology e. Efficiency - Ability to manage all of the aboveChapter 4. The primacy of land powerContinental vs. Insular great powersNuclear superiorityChapter 5. Strategies for survival a. War - Direct attack as rationally calculated gamble b. Blackmail - c. Bait and bleed - d. Bloodletting - e. Balancing - f. Buck-passing - Triple Entente tried to contain Wilhemine Germany. League of Nations tried to contain Nazi Germany. g. Appeasement - h. Bandwagoning - Minor or weak powers wait to see which side is ascendent before joining.Operational state goals: a. Regional hegemony b. Maximum wealth c. Pre-eminent land power d. Nuclear superiorityChapter 6. Great Powers in actionDo great powers act as offensive realism predicts?a. Great power politics involves clashing revisionist statesb. Status quo power are regional hegemons that constantly seek opportunities to gain powerDefensive realists explain why some aggressors suceed while others fail by comparing “expanders” and “over-expanders.”Smart aggressors vs. irrational aggressorsDon't blame wacky home-front politics - Nations make calculated risks based on surroundingsWe cannot predict the long-term asymetric diffusion of military technology, i.e. cyberwar, social media, etc.Chapter 7. The offshore balancers: The United States and United Kingdom US did not fight WWI and WWII to make peace but to prevent foe from becoming regional hegemon.Water stopped the US and UK because of Great Power balance.Chapter 8. Balancing vs. Buck-passingGreat powers try to balance in a bipolar world because there is no one to pass the buck to. In a multi-polar world, it is much easier to pass the buck.States buck-pass because the cost of containing a hegemon is great.Chapter 9. The causes of Great Power warBipolarity vs. Multi-polarityBalanced vs. unbalanced polarityNeighbors of a potential hegemon naturally ally to balance, the “classic security dilemma”“Power driad” diagram: More unbalanced driads result in more rivalries and greather potential for conflict.Miscalculation - Aggressors underestimate the response.European history1) Napoleonic era I, 1792-93 balanced multipolarity2) Napoleonic era II, 1793-1815, unbalance multipolarity3) 19th century, 1815-1902, balanced multipolarity4) Kaiserreich era, 1903-1918, unbalanced multipolarity5) Interwar years, 1919-1938, balanced multipolarity6) Nazi era, 1939-1945, unbalanced multi-polarity7) Cold War, 1945-1990, bipolarity10. Great power politics of the 21st CenturyDemocracies do not necessarily make natural allies because democracies can fail just like other systems.China as potential regional hegemon less

Download links for: La logica di potenza. L'America, le guerre, il controllo del mondo

Advertising