124 CHAPTER fouR ■ The InTernaTIonal SySTemthe end of the Cold War, an evolving new order whose purposes are the promotion of
liberal democracy, capitalism, and human rights. Constructivists agree with other
theorists that power matters in the international system, but they propose that the
meaning of “power” can change over time. As Finnemore writes, “[W]hat made 1815
a concert and 1950 a cold war was not the material distribution of capabilities but the
shared meanings and interpretations participants imposed on those capabilities.”^12
Constructivists see not a material structure in the international system but rather a
socially constructed pro cess. While the prominent constructivist Alexander Wendt, in
Social Theory of International Politics, agrees with the fundamental premise of realists
that the system is anarchic, he contends that the whole notion of anarchy is socially
constructed: anarchy is what states make of it.^13 The meaning of anarchy is not con-
stant across geographic space or through time. Anarchy leads to no par tic u lar outcome
unless we agree it does. States debate anarchy’s meaning and in turn give it meaning.
Neither sovereignty nor balance of power objectively exist. Thus, constructivists reject
the notion that the international system exists objectively or gives rise to objective rules
or princi ples.
Constructivists believe that what does change are norms, although not all norm
changes will be transforming. Social norms can be changed through both actions of
the collective and the efforts of charismatic individuals. Individuals matter in both real-
ist and liberal theory, but they matter differently. For constructivists, they matter in
how they affect discourse (how we frame and understand our world in talking, writ-
ing, and performing). Collectively, norms may change through coercion, but most
likely, through international institutions, law, and social movements. So although mate-
rial capabilities do matter in explaining change, just as realists and many liberals argue,
“why one order emerges rather than another” can only be seen, Finnemore argues, “by
examining the ideas, culture, and social purpose of the actors involved.”^14
Constructivists, then, are interested in understanding the major changes in the nor-
mative structure: how the use of force has evolved over time, how the view of who is
human has changed, how ideas about democracy and human rights have internation-
alized, and how states have been socialized—or resisted socialization—in turn.a dvantages and Disadvantages of the
International System as a level of analy sis
For adherents of all theoretical perspectives, using the international system as a level
of analy sis has clear advantages. The language of systems theory allows comparison
and contrasts between systems: we may compare the international system at one point
in time with one at another point in time; compare international systems with internalESSIR7_CH04_106_131_11P.indd 124 6/14/16 10:04 AM