�

In the study of International Relations, how does "idealism" differ from "realism."

What are the proponents of each trying to achieve?

In essence, the study of international relations primarily concerns the relations between different states and the sources of conflict states face among one another. John Herz would say that realism and idealism applies to "those who behave according to the 'real', that is, existing givens, and those who engage in wishful thinking". Ideally, our world would exist without conflict. Ideally, there would be no poverty, no one would suffer, and money would grow on trees. Realistically, we work, sweat and endure every day for a better world, all the while being aware that people are oppressed, overpowered and mistreated. This is why idealism and realism conflict - two political ideologies that are most often compared with one another.

The League of Nations: A Pictorial Summary, Geneva...

President Woodrow Wilson asking Congress to declar...

President Wilson before Congress, announcing the b...

Idealism - reaching high with the assumption that practically anything is possible. Realism - the anxiety in taking risks and the willingness to only seek or reach out to what is guaranteed to succeed. It focuses objectively and primarily on positivism by approaching what is and what we face directly, often viewed as the pessimist. On the other hand, idealism can be closely associated with normative analysis, as it focuses on what things ought to be and how the world would be like idealistically. In this essay, I will be using the terms 'idealism' and 'liberalism' interchangeably.

Idealists paint a vividly positive image of the world, picturing each human being to be inherently good. Both idealism and liberalism become interchangeable as they agree on the primarily distinctive idea that the right choice being...