Kenneth Waltz is an indispensable theorist
In the final decades of the last century, and creeping into the present, the zeitgeist
in the study of all branches of the Social Sciences and Humanities moved against
honouring ‘great thinkers’. The so-called ‘canon’ attracted particular disdain in
postmodern and postcolonial writing, being seen as synonymous with discredited
‘Western’ ways of thinking. This was a fashion I did not like at the time, and still
do not, for the canon comprises classic texts and iconic scholars; above all, it is the
repository of the ideas that made us. To understand the canon is therefore an important
part of trying to know ourselves. In their disdain for the IR canon of – admittedly
- mostly dead white men, the foot soldiers of opposition not only distanced
themselves from key issues, but they also seemed blind to the identity of their own
generals. The (feminist) philosopher Mary Daly spied the double standard, and tried
to take the wind out of (female) academics working on postmodern theory, by
pointing out that they were themselves ‘puppets of dead white males like Michel
Foucault’.^5
Today’s renewed interest in the great realist thinkers and theorists^6 (notably Hans
J. Morgenthau) is to be welcomed. There are many justifications for adopting – once
in a while – a ‘great-thinkers’ approach to engaging with the fundamental issues in
any branch of learning. Studying classic works in depth is one way of learning how
to write and to think. ‘Classics’ are invariably better written than the workaday
textbooks and articles that presently weigh down our desks, while attempting to
comprehend great minds grappling with great issues is among the most taxing
intellectual work there is. More specifically, focusing on a distinguished career or
on a classic book is a potentially fruitful way of trying to understand the develop-
ment of a body of thought, or a whole discipline. In International Politics, with its
multiple schools and periodic great debates, much can be gained by trying to
understand the work of scholars who have attempted to provide an organised
framework of answers for our universe of questions. Even when one considers a
particular theory to be wrong, the way its exponents have developed it invariably
stimulates ideas, warnings, and methods to help one’s own work.
For these general reasons, as well as the contingency of the double anniversaries
of his two classic books, the time is ripe for another reconsideration of major aspects
of the work of Kenneth Waltz. I will outline the claim that he is one of our truly
indispensable theorists under three headings: scholar, theoryand theorist.
First, as ascholar, Waltz has an outstanding reputation in our field, attested to by
leading figures. Note the following: ‘All students of international politics are familiar
with Kenneth Waltz’s famous books’ (Robert Jervis); ‘Kenneth N. Waltz is the pre-
eminent theorist of his generation’ (Robert O. Keohane); ‘Kenneth Waltz is the
most important international relations theorist of the past half century’ (John J.
Mearsheimer); ‘Kenneth Waltz is the pre-eminent international relations theorist of
the post-World War II era’ (Stephen M. Walt).^7 The chapters below will help
readers appraise whether such acclaim is justified.
While his reputation is the highest, Waltz has not been a prolific author by the
standards of our times. His books are relatively few in number, and none is the size
Realism redux 3