Critique of Morgenthau's Principles of Realism

 In Tickner’s Hans Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism: A Feminist Reformulation, she argues that using a feminist perspective in International Relations could lead to alternate courses of action when it comes to international political issues. Her article presents the focus of International Relations through Morgenthau’s principles of political realism, of which the primary concern is power and security. Morgenthau defines these terms in international politics as “masculine”, which is an explanation of why women are considered not present or fully qualified to participate in political affairs.

Morality is objective in the long run because when it comes to international affairs, there is no way to appease all parties in a just and rapid manner. In today's political climate, the definition of morality and personal morals are completely different which makes international affairs of any scale subject to critique on whether or not it was moral. This is one of the main principles of realism because it emphasizes the security, power, and survival of the state. This perspective has been considered “masculine” and Tickner suggests that the belief of the realist theory is upheld primarily by men. Therefore this is where the feminist perspective comes in. Women in politics are considered to be more interested in human security and human rights issues, and in the Tickner reading, “femininity” is associated with “morality”. IR feminists do agree that there is a gender hierarchy, where most of the language used is masculine and most questions asked concern men’s interests. The gender hierarchy that is present in International Politics is similar to the hierarchy between man and nature.

The concern of environmental destruction is one of the largest issues present, which impacts every aspect of life on the planet. The importance of state power and national security, according to realism, will not even matter in the long run due to the impending threat concerning the environment. Tickner mentions that this concern is not common or popular with traditional international relations. The connection between feminism and ecology was briefly questioned in class, but it reminded me of a discussion and reading from my Political Economy class that I took last semester. Cynthia Kaufman’s book Ideas for Action: Relevant Theory for Radical Change emphasizes how the theories that mobilize relationships between political actors are old fashioned and continue to be detrimental to the future of the global economy. Kaufman writes about the ecofeminist ideology that women are more in tune with nature and believe that we as humans should view nature in a symbiotic manner instead of as an instrumental relationship. I do have certain critiques about the ecofeminist view, however, my takeaway from Kaufman’s chapter is that in opposition to the realism perspective, the mutually beneficial relationship to nature that ecofeminists claim we as humans need could lead to the priority of mutually beneficial military and economic security.