Should We All Be Realists Now?

Very short summary: This essay argues that there are strong reasons to be political realists in the current context. Political realism entails a rejection of ideal theory and invites us to view politics as distinct from morality and ethics. I point to two particular reasons why realism is vindicated today. First, it’s part of the broader “naturalization” of philosophy. Second, it’s better placed to capture the transformation of liberal democracies and the demise of the liberal international order.

In the 1960s, it was very common to observe that “we’re all Keynesians now” – the statement has been attributed to economists Henry Hazlitt and Milton Friedman, but also appropriated by U.S. President Richard Nixon. It was a way to convey that Keynesian ideas were now the mainstream, even if many continued to oppose them. With historical hindsight, the statement made at the heyday of Keynesian economics also announced the coming demise of Keynesianism.

In a similar spirit, as the first quarter of the 21st century has just ended, I would dare to ask: “should we all be realists now?” What I mean by realism is a general stance toward (geo)political phenomena that, roughly, considers that our assessment of political actions and events should be grounded in a proper theoretical and empirical understanding of the mechanisms underlying these actions and events. Realism spans across several fields: realism in international relations, realism in democratic theory, realism in political philosophy. What follows specifically addresses the latter, but also to some extent applies to the first two.

With respect to political philosophy and political theory, realists display at least five commitments.[1] First, for realists, politics (or the political) is a distinct domain of action – distinct, especially, from ethics and morality. Second, realists tend to criticize political theory as being excessively tied to idealized and overly optimistic accounts of morality. Third, realists emphasize the agonistic and conflictual nature of politics, typically by endorsing some variation of value pluralism. Fourth, realists view politics as being foremost concerned with the establishment and preservation of the social order, rather than the pursuit of justice or any other overarching substantive ends. Finally, realists emphasize the risks of wishful thinking and political action motivated by noble moral considerations that disregard historical, social, economic, and other conditions in which it takes place.

Unsurprisingly, realists are critical of “ideal theory,” i.e., the endeavor to seek for principles and institutions that realize ...