THE EMINENT SCHOLAR Pratap Bhanu Mehta in a recent column in Indian Express launched a scathing attack on the recent turn of political events. In the passionate article, the bone of contention was the realist approach to international politics. By citing Czesław Miłosz’s ‘The Captive Mind’, Mehta went on to criticise ‘realism’, associating it with conformity and obedience.
The ‘realist’ approach to international relations, usually associated with the pursuit of national interest on the international stage, receives a serious epistemic backlash from Pratap Bhanu Mehta. He lists the following characteristics of the realist school:
It is antagonistic to morality.
It allows one to adapt to the new imperial realities of the world.
It is a ‘manlier’ approach to politics.
It makes citizens conformists in the name of practicality.
It portrays power as truth.
It facilitates imperialism and authoritarianism.
It follows a “ suck up, kick down” philosophy.
Yet, despite its passion, Mehta's work suffers from certain conceptual errors. An attempt, therefore, shall be made to analyse and clarify the content of the realist philosophy in international relations. To start with, the piece will resort to Post- Structuralism that argues in favour of the multiplicity of meaning, and Wittgenstein’s ideas in ‘Philosophical Investigations’, which argues that language is context-driven.
