Talk:Classical realism (international relations)

Requested move

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

discussion changed to multi-move nomination so closing the individual move request

---

Classical realism in international relations theory → Classical realism (international relations) – This page should be moved in line with standard practice; per Wikipedia:PRECISION#Precision_and_disambiguation and Wikipedia:NCDAB#Naming_the_specific_topic_articles. KarlB (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd go for Classical realism (international relations theory) personally making a distinction between international relations and IR as an academic discipline Francium12 (talk) 16:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've nominated a number of other articles from {{International_relations_theories}} similarly. Given that these issues are covered in both International relations and International relations theory, I would argue we should use the broader term, since many of the articles in this space treat practical as well as theoretical considerations, and we may as well be consistent.--KarlB (talk) 16:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

To be honest you’re free to do what you want here as I won’t be concentrating on this area anymore. Too much work for one person and I don’t think any editors have really contributed here in three years. I’ve written a few stubs over at Security studies but we don’t even have much on leading IR texts like Social Theory of International Politics. Bottom line is we need content contributors. Francium12 (talk) 16:55, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Realism in international relations - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 19:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Morality in classical realism

This article should be updated to reflect the moral elements found and discussed in classical realism.

For instance, “[m]orality is not just another branch of human activity, coordinate to the substantive branches, such as politics or economics. Quite to the contrary, it is superimposed upon them, limiting the choice of ends and means and delineating the legitimate sphere of a particular branch of action altogether” (Morgenthau, 1950, p. 253, as quoted in Scheuerman, 2007).

hostile takeover

Dear Editors, There has long been a classical realism international relations page, to which some of us who work in the paradigm have added. I am the founder and the person who coined the term classical realism. Recently, Jonathan Kirshner published a book that appropriate the term "classical realism" uses it very differently and had one of his assistants rewrite the web page to completely remove what was there any references to any of us or our books. The most recent posting does include some references but still takes the form of a hostile takeover. I rewrote the page (and filled out the copyright form so there would be no legal problem) and have repeatedly posted it only to have it taken down.

I would like to add that I contacted some half-dozen other scholars who have written on classical realism attaching my rewrite. I made it clear that the page should not represent one person's take and urged them to edit and add and refer in great detail to their own contributions. My goal is to make the page pluralist and reflective of the work in the paradigm. It is grossly inappropriate for someone outside, and generally hostile to it, to substitute a description of his work and take for what was there.

One solution is to restore the page the way it was before Kirshner's minions rewrote it. Another is for you to email -- I'm happy to provide names and addresses -- of the leading scholars who work in the paradigm asking them to adjudicate or offer advice. I've talked to two of them -- Sean Molloy and Bill Scheuerman -- and both feel that the Kirshner rewrites are unwarranted, intrusive, and an attempt to advance his own parochial agenda at our collective expense.

I am happy to provide any additional information you may require.

Let me close by noting that I recently retired after 54 years as a professor and have long been recognized as a leading authority in the field and someone committed to diversity and pluralism. Nedlebow (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2023 (UTC)