Melian Dialogue as interpreted through perspectives of Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism

1175 Words3 Pages

Melian Dialogue as interpreted through perspectives of Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism

Imagine Cleomedes, son of Lycomedes, general of the famed forces of the lustrous Athenian Empire, waiting for a trio of representatives to return from The Melian Dialogue. “Well?” he demands impatiently as they arrive, “What did they say?”

As perspectives and opinions in the realm of political science are fluid and bound to change, he receives a variety of replies, for the representatives body he sent happen to comprise a Realist, a Liberal and a Constructivist. The variances the philosophies and universal laws his representatives throw back at him intrigue General Cleomedes. He recognizes that within the power play of the world, and the role of Athens as a superpower within the world’s political arena, he must be thoroughly versed in every possible political perspective. Thus, he invites his representatives to share their own view of what transpired between the dialogue between the Melians and the Athenians.

The Realist, absolutely dedicated to the preservation and security of the Athenian Empire declares stoutly, “General, it is no great surprise that our negotiations reflected the success and dominance of realism in the political arena.” The Liberal, mindful of universal pathos over such a nationalistic approach, gasps. Deeply moved by the proceedings of the Melian dialogue, and aghast at the lack of understanding in her fellow representatives, she offers a venomous retort, “To hell with realism! Can’t you see the truth? Oh, my comrades are blind to the universal laws of right and wrong! Truly, our very invasion of this people is immoral! We should be moved by empathy and compassion for the Melians!” A steady, even voice i...

... middle of paper ...

...ialogue are enveloped in the great ‘ism’ constructs for which this extremely modern political theory is known (Hughes, Chp.3). And as the Constructivist sees social groups interacting within the world, he contributes to our understanding of the groups through the invention of identity. The Constructivists label groups of people with common interests and gives words with which to speak of rising ideas and philosophies.

The Melian Dialogue bears a host of political interpretations as the Melians and Athenians negotiate the reality of power and rights of countries on the scale of empires. Though Cleomedes eventually relied on the heavy handed realist course of action in the Peloponnesian War, ideally, he could have cultivated a healthy respect for differing universal truths of political theories and the fluidity of interpretation in every text available to us today.

Show More
Related

  • Just and Unjust Speech in Aristophanes' "Clouds"

    591 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout Aristophanes’ “Clouds” there is a constant battle between old and new. It makes itself apparent in the Just and Unjust speech as well as between father and son. Ultimately, Pheidippides, whom would be considered ‘new’, triumphs over the old Strepsiades, his father. This is analogous to the Just and Unjust speech. In this debate, Just speech represents the old traditions and mores of Greece while the contrasting Unjust speech is considered to be newfangled and cynical towards the old. While the defeat of Just speech by Unjust speech does not render Pheidippides the ability to overcome Strepsiades, it is a parallel that may be compared with many other instances in Mythology and real life.

    Read More

  • Violence and Monarchy in The Literary Works of Oresteia

    509 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the ancient myths from the Aegean seas, much political theory is derived. Lessons on the dangers associated with monarchical political forms are brought to light. The connection between gender and power along with violence, war and necessity raise questions to enact a democracy and depersonalize the government.

    Read More

  • An Analysis of Thucydides' Views on the Melian Dialogue

    1591 Words  | 4 Pages

    In this paper, I will first extract Thucydides views from the Melian Dialogue and then analyze whether or not these views are well founded. Thucydides believed that the Athenians had the stronger argument. Proof of this lies in the way Thucydides picked the arguments for each side. For the moment, we will disregard the actual content of the arguments, and look at argumentation forms and the flow of the debate. The Melians argued using consequences of an Athenian take over.

    Read More

  • Pericles’s Funeral Oration and Greek Society

    854 Words  | 2 Pages

    Athens government and military is considerably different from their neighbors. According to Pericles, Athens government is not a copy of our neighbors...

    Read More

  • The Mytilene Debate and Athenian Debate

    1590 Words  | 4 Pages

    The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.

    Read More

  • The Powerful Clytemnestra in Aeschylus' Oresteia

    2076 Words  | 5 Pages

    What Price Glory? was the title of a Maxwell Anderson play about World War I. Although the Oresteia deals with the period following a much different war, the same question can be asked of it. In the trilogy Aeschylus presents the reader with a stunning example of ancient Greek society, in which warrior ideals were firmly held, and glory in battle was considered the supreme good. The question of moral justification in the trilogy brings in many complex issues, but all of them revolve around the construction of Greek society and the role of different individuals in this system. Two of the most extraordinary characters are the personages of Agamemnon and his wife Clytemnestra. This couple confronts the reader with a myriad assortment of issues, but one of the most thought-provoking is the issue of justification. We are presented with two unnatural murders: that of Iphigeneia by her father Agamemnon, and later that of Agamemnon by Clytemnestra. It is very difficult to argue from merely these facts as to who was more justified in the killings. Many would say Clytemnestra because it was Agamemnon who began the whole situation, but others would argue that society forced Agamemnon into this position. These responses are based only on circumspect and superficial evidence and do not drive to the heart of the issue. To fully understand these characters and to answer the question of their justification one must view their actions in the context of the society in which they lived, and also the role of free-will or self-determination in this society. I will argue that although both characters were victims of the warrior society in which they lived, it was Clytemnestra who was more justified ...

    Read More

  • The Use of Rhetoric In Athenian Democracy

    1812 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...e most responsible decision and proves that the results of Cleon’s style of rhetoric does not always render the best results. It is essentially Cleon’s ability to clearly see the entirety of Athens’ power and the choices, guided by nomos or phusis, necessary to maintain their supremacy that allows him to ascend as a demagogue among The People and become one of the most influential voices in Athens.

    Read More

  • The Obama Doctrine: Article Analysis

    1016 Words  | 3 Pages

    Realism can be described as a theoretical approach used to analyze all international relations as the relation of states engaged in power (Baylis, Owens, Smith, 100). Although realism cannot accommodate non-state actors within its analysis. There are three types of realism which include classical (human

    Read More

  • A Critical Analysis of Crime and Social Harm

    651 Words  | 2 Pages

    Jowett, B. (2009) ‘Politics by Aristotle, 350 B.C.E’, Classics, 2009 [On-line], http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.2.two.html (Accessed 9 December 2013).

    Read More

  • Peloponnesian War Essay

    2197 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Peloponnesian War is the conflict between the pelopoponesians league led by Sparta and the Delian league, led by Athens. Much of our knowledge on the causes and events of the Peloponnesian War, depends on the Athenian Thucydides 460-400 BC, writer of the History of the Peloponessian War. He servd as an Athenian commander in Northern Greece during the early years of the war until the assembly exiled him as he lost an outpost to the enemy. During this exile, he was able to interview witnesses on both sides of the conflicted. Unlike Heredotus he concentrated on contemporary history and presented his account of the war in an annalistic framework that only occasionally diverts from chronological order. In his account, he discuses the precursors to the war, including the 30 years truce and revolutions, such as the stasis in Corcyra. When looking at wars, the primary focus is normally the fighting itself, such as what we see for World War II. However, it is important to look at the anatomy of war, meaning what effect the war has on the people who are experiencing it first hand, and the consquences that the conflict has on the rest of the world. Therefore in this essay I shall discuss, drawing directly from Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War, how the civilians reacted to the war, their involvement and socio economic factors. Furthermore, the first section of my essay shall focus on the direct effect of war on the people, regarding the plague, and violence and hopelessness that was experienced. Then I shall go on to discuss more general effects of the war and how it affected the Greek world, discussing the social and economic losses that occurred such as the cost of the war in attica, the coup d’etat that occurred in gove...

    Read More

  • Essay On Klute By Laura Mullvey

    1316 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to Laura Mulvey, women function on two levels in Hollywood classical cinema: as an erotic object for the character in the diegesis, and as an erotic object for the spectators in the theater. Explain Mulvey’s argument and apply it to either Klute or Jeanne Dielman. (your answer should not be confined only to examples of men looking at women, but may also consider the possibility of women looking at women.) If Mulvey is correct, can women ever function as active participants in the narrative? How does the film support or negate tgis point?

    Read More

  • Neo-Realism and Liberalism: Comparing These Two Different Frameworks Used in International Relations

    1232 Words  | 3 Pages

    In order for countries to cohesively overcome international barriers, frameworks of ideal political standards must be established. Two of these frameworks constantly discussed in international relations are the theories of Neo-realism and Liberalism; two theories with their own outlook at the way politicians should govern their country as well as how they should deal with others. Neo-realism lies on the structural level, emphasizing on anarchy and the balance of power as a dominant factor in order to maintain hierarchy in international affairs. In contrast, Liberalism's beliefs are more permissive, focusing on the establishments of international organizations, democracy, and trade as links to strengthen the chain of peace amongst countries. Liberalism provides a theory that predominantly explains how states can collaborate in order to promote global peace; however, as wars have been analyzed, for example World War II, the causes of them are better explained by Neo-realist beliefs on the balance of power and states acting as unitary actors. Thus, looking out for their own self interest and security.

    Read More

  • Realism And Liberalism Research Paper

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    In International Relations it is commonly accepted that there is a wide range of different theoretical approaches which attempt to provide an explanation for the different dynamics of the global political system. Realism and Liberalism are well known theories which are considered to be two of the most important theories in international relations. They are two contrasting ideas when it comes to explaining how two states relate to each other in the absence of a world government. Both theories agree that the world is in anarchy and therefore it is helpful to start with a definition of anarchy and what it implies. This essay aims to discuss the contrasts between Liberalism and Realism as well as how these two theories agree that the world is anarchy.

    Read More

  • Understanding International Relations

    1517 Words  | 4 Pages

    To understand the international relations of contemporary society and how and why historically states has acted in such a way in regarding international relations, the scholars developed numerous theories. Among these numerous theories, the two theories that are considered as mainstream are liberalism and realism because the most actors in stage of international relations are favouring either theories as a framework and these theories explains why the most actors are taking such actions regarding foreign politics. The realism was theorized in earlier writings by numerous historical figures, however it didn't become main approach to understand international relations until it replaced idealist approach following the Great Debate and the outbreak of Second World War. Not all realists agrees on the issues and ways to interpret international relations and realism is divided into several types. As realism became the dominant theory, idealistic approach to understand international relations quickly sparked out with failure of the League of Nation, however idealism helped draw another theory to understand international relations. The liberalism is the historical alternative to the realism and like realism, liberalism has numerous branches of thoughts such as neo-liberalism and institutional liberalism. This essay will compare and contrast the two major international relations theories known as realism and liberalism and its branches of thoughts and argue in favour for one of the two theories.

    Read More

  • International Relations

    2631 Words  | 6 Pages

    The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power would be the UN’s ability to influence the actions of states within the UN but the state itself has the power to determine how they act. Morgenthau goes on to his next level of analysis in which he explains the difference in force and power in the international realm. Force is physical violence, the use of military power but power is so much more than that. A powerful state can control the actions of another state with the threat of force but not actually need to physical force. He believed that the ability to have power over another state simply with the threat of force was likely to be the most important element in analysis the power of as state (Kleinberg 2010, 33-34).

    Read More

More about Melian Dialogue as interpreted through perspectives of Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism

Open Document