Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?

Abstract

In his article “Realist Constructivism,”Barkin (2003:338) described constructivism as a cluster of research methods and analytical tools: a “set of assumptions about how to study world politics” rather than a “set of assumptions about how politics work.” As such, constructivism is subject to E.H. Carr's dialectic between realism and utopianism. Barkin also argued that the problem with contemporary constructivism is that it has been dominated by liberalism and idealism; it would therefore benefit from a healthy infusion of realism. Much of Barkin's essay is aimed at showing that mainstream constructivism is, or can be, broadly compatible with classical realist theory. Barkin is right that mainstream US constructivism is liberal and idealist. In this respect, his article serves as an important overarching statement of a position implicitly taken by a growing number of constructivist scholars. However, Barkin underplays the real and substantial differences between a commitment to understanding the social world as a product of contingent social interactions, on the one hand, and a commitment to understanding the social world as a result of natural necessity, on the other. These divergent commitments are assumptions about how politics works—assumptions that place constructivism in opposition to both liberal and realist approaches to contemporary international relations. By ignoring these distinctions, Barkin's arguments amount to a call for a “constructivist realism”—a realism that takes norms and ideas seriously as objects of analysis—rather than a “realist-constructivism”—a constructivism that involves a self-consistent set of arguments about why power cannot be, in any way, transcended in international politics. The latter approach represents the key space in the field occupied by realist-constructivism, and it provides a better basis for promoting both a dialogue within constructivism and a dialogue between constructivism and realism. Where would a properly understood realist-constructivism fit into the disputes between the so-called “isms” in …