Ever since taking POLI 260 last year, I have been so interested in and curious about international relations. The field of IR strikes me as so insanely relevant and important that I am eager to learn more about it, which is what led me to this class. I transferred from Environmental Science to Political Science and as a result have taken classes in a weird order, with POLI 260 being my first Political Science class. I was taken aback by how much knowledge my classmates possessed regarding theories and issues in International Relations before the professor introduced the topics, and found myself having to do a lot of catch up. In all the reading I did I became so interested in the different theories that suggest the way states/countries interact the way they do.

More specifically, I think the theory of realism explains the world well. I do not necessarily want realism to dominate, but I personally think it best explains the way states interact in the world today. Chapters 2 and 3 in the textbook cover both classical and structural realism, and I found both to make more sense than any other IR theory. The self-interested nature of states and their quest for power accurately describes how most first-world countries navigate the international system. Big powers only get involved in world crisis when it could benefit them. I think the Rwandan genocide is a good example, in which the rest of the world did very little to prevent the genocide from occurring or halting, as Rwanda holds no real political or financial interest for them. Contrastingly, many big powers are involved in the Syrian Civil War, as holds more importance and interest to them. Looking at the issue from an American lens, they could be interested in Syria because they want to increase their influence in the Middle East, as well as prevent their enemy, Russia, from gaining further influence there. I think the theory of Liberalism is more hopeful and paints a better picture for the world, but at this moment, Realism offers the best explanation and description of the way states behave. I of course realize that no theory is perfect, and that realism is flawed. Perhaps in this class I will change my mind as we discuss different theories.

So far in class we have discussed the question of whether International Relations is actually a science and whether or not there is an agreement about what IR should or should not be considered. This is an aspect of the IR that I had not even thought to consider prior to the class but I think its important to define IR before you study it. Overall I took this class (and decided not to drop it) because I am curious about international politics and want to deepen my understanding on the subject.