Realism and liberalism are two of the most influential theories in IB Global Politics, offering contrasting explanations of how the global system works and why states behave the way they do. Understanding their differences is essential for exam questions that require comparison, evaluation, or application of theory to real-world issues.
The most fundamental difference lies in how each theory views the international system. Realism argues that the system is anarchic and inherently competitive. With no global authority to guarantee security, states must prioritize survival and self-help. Liberalism accepts anarchy but believes it does not make cooperation impossible. Instead, shared interests and institutions can manage anarchy and reduce conflict.
Another major difference concerns the role of the state. Realism treats states as the primary and most important actors in global politics. States are seen as rational, unitary actors pursuing national interest defined in terms of power and security. Liberalism, by contrast, adopts a broader view of actors. It recognises the influence of international institutions, non-state actors, and domestic political structures in shaping global outcomes.
The two theories also differ in their understanding of power. Realists emphasise military and economic power as the key drivers of state behaviour. Power is seen as finite and competitive, meaning one state’s gain is often another’s loss. Liberals accept the importance of power but argue that cooperation can create mutual gains. Power can be exercised through institutions, norms, and economic interdependence rather than force alone.
A key area of contrast is international cooperation. Realists are sceptical of long-term cooperation, arguing that states fear cheating, dependency, and relative losses. Cooperation only occurs when it serves immediate national interests. Liberalism, on the other hand, sees cooperation as sustainable. Institutions reduce uncertainty, interdependence raises the cost of conflict, and repeated interaction builds trust.
Finally, the theories differ in their view of conflict and change. Realism sees conflict as inevitable due to human nature and systemic pressures. Change is slow and driven mainly by shifts in power. Liberalism is more optimistic, arguing that political progress is possible through institutions, democracy, and shared norms.
For IB Global Politics students, the key is not choosing one theory as “correct” but understanding how each explains different aspects of global politics. High-level answers compare their assumptions, apply them to specific issues, and evaluate their strengths and limitations.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What is the main difference between realism and liberalism?
Realism focuses on power, security, and competition, while liberalism emphasizes cooperation, institutions, and interdependence. Their assumptions about state behaviour differ significantly. IB students should highlight these contrasts clearly.
Which theory is more pessimistic about global politics?
Realism is more pessimistic because it sees conflict as inevitable. Liberalism is more optimistic about cooperation and progress. This difference is central to theory comparison questions.
Do realism and liberalism agree on anything?
Both agree that the international system is anarchic and that states matter. However, they interpret the consequences of anarchy differently. This shared starting point is useful in exam comparisons.
Which theory better explains modern global politics?
Neither theory explains everything. Realism is strong on security and conflict, while liberalism explains cooperation and institutions well. IB answers should evaluate rather than choose one side.
How should this comparison be used in exams?
Students should compare assumptions, apply each theory to the same issue, and evaluate effectiveness. Clear structure improves marks. Balanced judgement is essential for high-level responses.
