Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:39:27.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morgenthau's theory and practice: a response to Peter Gellman

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Jaap W. Nobel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his lively essay on Hans Morgenthau Peter Gellman points out that the school of realism was essentially ‘an association based upon a common repudiation of unfounded hopes for a new world’. But he cautions that ‘beyond this shared purpose, the diversity of theoretical priorities among “Realists” … limits the utility of realism as a word that can either describe or enlighten’. Certainly, on the nature of power, the ends of politics, the role of morality, the national interest, the meaning of theory itself Morgenthau had his own views. On many of these matters Gellman sets us right. We have here, I believe, a fair account of Morgenthau's views and a profound analysis of his theoretical approach.

Type
Discussion
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , July 1989 , pp. 261 - 271
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Gellman, Peter, ‘Hans J. Morgenthau and the Legacy of Political Realism’, Review of International Studies, xiv (10 1988), pp. 247–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Ibid., p. 248.

3. Ibid., p. 247.

4. Jaap Willem Nobel, De utopie van het realisme. De machtstheorie van Hans J. Morgenthau en de kritiek op het Amerikaanse heleid in de Koude Oorlog (The Utopia of Realism. Hans J. Morgenthau's Theory of Power Politics and his Critique of American Foreign Policy in the Cold War) (Amsterdam, 1985).

5. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘Another “Great Debate”: The National Interest of the United States’, American Political Science Review, xlvi (12 1952), pp. 971 ff.Google Scholar

6. Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics among Nations. The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York, 2nd edn, 1954), pp. 5, 8.Google Scholar

7. With the notable exception of his ultimate deference to Dean Acheson's views on the nature of the Soviet challenge, which is quoted in Gellman, op. cit., pp. 257–8.

8. Morgenthau, Hans J., In Defense of the National Interest (New York, 1951), p. 62.Google Scholar

9. Ibid., p. 77.

10. Morgenthau, Hans J., A New Foreign Policy for the United States (New York, 1969), chapter 3.Google Scholar

11. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘Fears and Spheres’, New Leader, 9 09 1968, p. 7.Google Scholar

12. Morgenthau, , A New Foreign Policy for the United States, op. cit., p. 163.Google Scholar

13. Gellman, op. cit., p. 253.

14. See e.g. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘The Machiavellian Utopia’, Ethics, lv (01 1945), pp. 145–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘The Conquest of the United States by Germany’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vi (1950), p. 24.Google Scholar

16. Ibid., p. 22. 17.

17. Ibid., p. 25.

18. Ibid., p. 26.

19. Morgenthau, In Defense of the National Interest, op. cit., p. 140.

20. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘Has Atomic War Really Become Impossible?’ Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, xii (1956), p. 9.Google Scholar

21. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘The Revolution in U.S. Foreign Policy’, Commentary, xxiii (02 1957), p. 105.Google Scholar

22. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘The Problem of the National Interest’, in Morgenthau, Politics in the Twentieth Century, vol. I; The Decline of Democratic Politics (Chicago, 1962), pp. 93, 94.Google Scholar

23. Morgenthau, , ‘Nationalism’, in Morgenthau, Politics in the Twentieth Century, vol. I, op. cit., pp. 189–190.Google Scholar

24. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘The Four Paradoxes of Nuclear Strategy’, American Political Science Review, lviii (03 1964), p. 35.Google Scholar

25. Gellman, op. cit., p. 262.

26. Morgenthau, , Politics among Nations, op. cit., 2nd edn (1954), ‘Preface to the Second Edition’.Google Scholar

27. Morgenthau, , In Defense of the National Interest, op. cit., p. 201.Google Scholar

28. Ibid., p. 79.

29. Ibid., p. 205.

30. Ibid., p. 209.

31. Morgenthau, Hans J., The Purpose of American Politics (New York, 1960), pp. 136–138;Google ScholarMorgenthau, , Politics among Nations, op. cit., 2nd edn (1954), pp. 391–398.Google Scholar

32. Gellman, op. cit., p. 256.

33. Morgenthau, , In Defense of the National Interest, op. cit., p. 33.Google Scholar

34. Morgenthau, , Politics among Nations, op. cit., 2nd edn (1954), p. 10.Google Scholar

35. Morgenthau, , Politics among Nations, op. cit., 1st edn (1948), p. 196.Google Scholar

36. Morgenthau, , In Defense of the National Interest, op. cit., p. 63.Google Scholar

37. Morgenthau, , Politics among Nations, op. cit., 2nd edn (1954), p. 10.Google Scholar

38. Morgenthau, , In Defense of the National Interest, op. cit., pp. 155, 156.Google Scholar

39. Tannenbaum, Frank, ‘The Balance of Power versus the Co-ordinate State’, Political Science Quarterly, lxvii (03 1951), pp. 173–197.Google Scholar

40. Morgenthau, , ‘Another “Great Debate”,’ op. cit., p. 964.Google Scholar

41. Morgenthau, , The Purpose of American Politics, op. cit., p. 8.Google Scholar

42. Ibid., p. 20.

43. Ibid., p. 20.

44. Ibid., p. 19.

45. Ibid., p. 30.

46. Ibid., p. 16.

47. Ibid., p. 26.

48. Ibid., p. 36.

49. Ibid., p. 36.

50. Morgenthau, , Politics among Nations, op. cit., 2nd edn (1954), p. 3.Google Scholar

51. Morgenthau, , In Defense of the National Interest, op. cit., p. 209.Google Scholar

52. Morgenthau, , Politics among Nations, op. cit., 2nd edn (1954), p. 8.Google Scholar

53. Morgenthau, Hans J., ‘Love and Power’, Commentary, xxxiii (1962).Google Scholar