Ann Tickner uses a feminine approach to challenge Morgenthau’s assumptions of political realism. In particular, she challenges his assumptions about human nature. Hans Joachim Morgenthau, a leading figure in the 20th century political science, made major contributions to the theory of international relations as well as the study of international law.
In “Politics among Nations”, Hans Morgenthau introduced the “Six Principles of Political Realism”. Morgenthau explains his position in realism by infusing it with moral considerations. In the first principle, Morgenthau states that political realism theory tends to think that objective laws that are based on the nature of humans govern politics and the general society. Secondly, Morgenthau argues that the concept of interest is an important aspect of the theory. According to him, power defines this concept and is the principal signpost of the theory.
Thirdly, Morgenthau argues that realism is aware of the cultural and political aspects of foreign policies and their impact on the meaning of power and interest. The fourth principle states that political realism theorists recognize the presence of the moral significance of political actions as well as the conflict between the needs of a successful political action and the moral aspects of the context. Moreover, Morgenthau states that true realism does not identify the specific aspirations of a country or community as per its morals. Finally, he states that the political realists tend to maintain the autonomy in a political world because the theory is based on the conception of the nature of humans, which is pluralistic.
Although Morgenthau’s theory has been widely appraised, Tickner disagrees with him. Specifically, she disagrees with all the six principles of political realism because of “masculine bias” in the explanations given by Morgenthau. Tickner starts with the question “why is the field of international politics a world of males?” She argues that there is underrepresentation of women in the important fields of military, international relations and diplomatic fields.
Tickner states that the international relations discourse is defined in a language that is distinctly masculine, which creates bias. A good example given in this case is the vocabularies used in nuclear strategies. Secondly, Tickner states that most professionals in the international relations and politics think that women are suitable in domestic matters that require the skills of nurturing. Moreover, Tickner states that the current state of the IR discipline, including IR academics, is hostile and unattractive to women.
Moreover, she disagrees with all the six principle of political realism. She states that males have made objective laws that govern politics. Rational theory and political behavior are derived from these laws. She disagrees with the second and third principles, saying that interest is defined using power, yet power involves the control of males by males. Thus, there is bias against women. In addition, Tickner states that realism is concerned with the balance between morality of political actions and the survival or success. However, she states that there is a state of inequality between the morals at the universal and national level.
Therefore, I learnt that the 20th century concepts of international politics were based on the political, academic and IR environment of the time, which was mainly dominated by males. As such, Tickner’s arguments are justified.