Idealist Theory

The devastating First World War in 1914 stimulated the quest for knowledge that could address
contemporary world problems in general and war in particular. A theoretical perspective with
sustainable generalizations about the conditions under which war might be avoided and peace
maintained was urgently needed. For that purpose, a theory was required to foresee incoming
wars reliably, and that could suggest policymakers how to prevent their outbreak.

The diplomatic historical perspective prevailed in the years after the First World War. Marxist
Leninist theory after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia also made a place for itself. But the
dominant theory between the two world wars in the Western Word was political idealism. Its
main advocates were Condorcet, Woodrow Wilson, Butterflied, and Bertrand Russell.

According to idealist theory, society and state are the outcomes of evolution. This process of
evolution is leading us towards perfection from imperfection. At this stage, peace and justice can
be established in society. Through the establishment of a family of nations, war, violence, and
immorality can be curbed.

Idealism emerged in the eighteenth century and is regarded as the major inspiration behind the
American and French Revolutions. Condorcet’s work of 1795 had everything considered the
essential basis of idealism in international relations. He was for a world order sans war, sans
inequality, and sans tyranny.

The world of this kind would be marked by constant progress in human welfare brought about by
the use of reason, education, and science. The theoretical premise of this is the result of the
liberal outlook of the Condorcet type. Idealism envisions the future international society based
on the idea of a reformed international system free from power politics, immorality, and
violence.

The idealist theory promises to bring about a better world with morality, education,
and international organization. The idealists think that political conflict was not for power but
between inconsistent principles and ideals. Idealists present different viewpoints about world
politics.

Basic Assumptions:
Kegley, Jr., and Wittkopf observe: What transformed their movement into a cohesive paradigm
among Western scholars was assumptions about the reality they shared and the homogeneity of
the conclusions their perspective elicited. According to them, idealists projected a world view
usually resting upon the following axioms:

 Human nature is essentially good and capable of altruism, mutual aid, and collaboration.
 The fundamental instinct of humans for the welfare of others makes progress possible.
 Bad human behavior is the product not of evil people but of evil institutions and
structural arrangements that create incentives for people to act selfishly and harm others,
including making war.
 Wars represent the worst feature of the international system.
 War is not inevitable and can be eliminated by doing away with the institutional
arrangements that encourage it.
  War is an international problem that requires global rather than national efforts to
eliminate it and therefore
 International society has to reorganize itself to eliminate the institutions that make war
likely.

To be clear, not all idealists subscribe to each of these tenets with equal emphasis. Many of them
would probably disagree with some of them. Nevertheless, these tenets jointly explain the basic
assumptions articulated in one way or another by the statesmen and theorists whose orientation
toward world affairs captivated world politics in the interwar period. This discussion embraced
ideals like moralism, optimism, and internationalism.

Suggestions for Reform:

The idealists offered the following remedies for solving international problems.

1. Moral nations should act according to moral principles in their international behavior,
avoid all kinds of traditional power politics, and follow policies of non-partisanship.
Behaving this way may gradually minimize the bad effects of power politics.

2. Attempts should be made to create supranational institutions to replace the competitive

and war-prone territorial states system. The setting up of the League of Nations and an
insistence on international cooperation in social matters as approaches to peace were
symptomatic of idealists’ institutional solutions to war. Many idealists went further in
suggesting that power politics could only be abolished by instituting a world government.
Thus in the ultimate analysis, this theory aspires for the ideal of world federation or one
world.

3. The legal control of war was also suggested. It called for new transnational norms to
check the initiation of war and, should it occur, its destructiveness. The Kellogg Briand
Pact of 1928, which outlawed war as an instrument of national policy, represents the legal
approach’s high point. They also advocated more faithful adherence to international law.

4. Another way suggested by idealists was to eliminate weapons. The attempts towards
global disarmament and arms control (the Washington naval conference of the 1920s, for
example) were symbolic of this peace path.

5. The efforts should be made to see that the totalitarian forces cease to exist, as the idealists
believe that the struggles so far have been between democratic and totalitarian states.
Totalitarianism is one of the main causes of war, and it must be eliminated.

6. Some idealists saw the way to peace and welfare in restructuring the international
monetary system and eliminating barriers to international trade. Still, others saw in the
principle of Self-determination the possibility to redraw the world’s political map under
the conviction that a world so arranged would be a peaceful world.
Critical Evaluation:
Idealist theory can be criticized on many counts. Most of the assumptions on which it is based
are only partially correct. Though full of ideas and norms, yet it is far from reality. No wonder it
is dubbed as imaginary, impracticable, and thus utopian. Suggestions given by it to reform the
international situation are difficult to be implemented. For example, at the international level,
nations seldom bother to follow moral precepts, nor do they strictly adhere to international law
and treaties.

Despite several serious attempts towards disarmament, no spectacular achievement has been
made in this field. It is impossible to eliminate totalitarianism. World government or world
federation is nowhere in sight. Kegley and Wittkopf rightly remarked, much of the idealist
program for reform was never tried, and even less of it was ever achieved. Thus, idealists have
enriched man’s thoughts, their ideas command respect, but the same cannot be realized or
executed in international relations.

Criticism apart, the theory has its importance because no science, at least no social science, can
exist without a normative aspect. It was also realized about international politics by writers like
Reinhold Niebuhr, Herbert Butterflied, and E.H Carr. The theory offers solutions to many
international problems. If they cannot be followed, the fault lies not in theory but in nations and
their leaders who are unable or constrained to put them into practice.