Man, the State, and War

Rating:
Summary: Not as spectacular as made to sound
Review: After reading this book i was so surprised how many people could accept it so uncritically. Waltz believes that the world comprises solely of states, the nature of which is irrelevent, that bounce off each other like billiard balls. Nowhere in his analysis is nationality, ideology, bureaucracy, gender, culture, religion, ethnicity, guerillas, media or even capitalism, yet all of these matter in international relations. Take for example the Vietnam war. That was a war fought against guerillas, by a nationalist state, to protect what it percieved to be its interests, informed by differnet bureaucracies (although not the CIA), being caught up in the paranoid culture of the Cold War, with racism against Asians playing a significant motivating role, yet withdrawing following increased media attention. its legacy is still felt today, in the understandable phobia the US feels towards risking a single soldiers life. Everything about the Vietnam war demonstrates the sociological aspect of it all, yet Waltz denies that sociology even exists in international politics, let alone influences it. Furthermore, the binary opposite of structured domestic politics and anarchic international politics should be reversed if discussing the third world, which 75% of states are, and 80% of people live.

There are other issues that prove beyond doubt that the model outlined in this book is absurdly simplistic, but even this brief analysis should be enough. The only reason you need to read this book is because other 'important' people have read it. As an analysis of international politics however, it has no grounding in the real world whatsoever and just intellectual garbage

Rating:
Summary: Still a must-read in the field of International Relations
Review: Look, it's this simple: if you are a serious student of international relations, you should read and know this book thoroughly. Waltz looks at three levels of analysis: Man (Individual), the State, and War (the international system). Along with Morgenthau, Waltz is one of the key writers representing the realist paradigm of IR. Despite all the revisions and attacks against this text, it's still a classic in the field.

Rating:
Summary: A seminal work in international relations
Review: Many criticisms to Waltz's work are unfounded, in that the book is not intended to be an end all for explaining wars in international relations. It does however, provide the reader with a theoretical framework of international relations. The three images of analysis provide for a generalization of the system in which war is promulgated. This book and a bevy of later works argue what level of analysis is best at explicating the cause of war. Don't read this book as a means to finding a simplistic answer to the cause of war, rather read it with the hope of gaining a better understanding of the causes of war.
For those interested in international relations, Keohane and Nye's works are very worthwhile.

Rating:
Summary: There's a reason it's a classic
Review: This asks some of the most important questions in political science. This was the book that launched Waltz's career, and it remains the most important book he has written. His question of war and his depressing conclusions are actually secondary to his method. He philosophically examines the question from three different angles in an inciteful and useful way. While some of it may seem obvious now, it wasn't in the 50s, and while it can be daunting to anyone without a background in philosophy and political science, it is a seminal work. Every scholar should take a look from different angles as Waltz has done.

Rating:
Summary: Not as spectacular as made to sound
Review: This book is a good caustic review of the methodology of world affairs. The book is a very simple and repetitive read. Though the ideas are absolutely brilliant analyses and very effective, all the major ideas of the book could have been shortened to within a page and still been just as effective. This is one of those books that talks about three central points (given away by the title) and states a thousand examples for each point. Just ask a friend what this one's about...dont bother reading it unless you have a professor that will test you on how many hairs napoleon had on his toes. Enjoy!

Rating:
Summary: An International Relations giant trying his hand at theory
Review: This is a strange little book. Written early in the academic career of Ken Waltz, this is essentially a political theory text written by an international relations giant. Alas, it sometimes reads like it. The prose is fine, but conceptually, its arguments are fairly simple and straightforward. In that sense it is ideal for the novice or an intro level class. For those with a more thorough background in the subject, three things are of particular interest. First, the clash (re the "First Image") between Waltz the neo-realist and his chosen foil--Hans Morgenthau. How viciously the young turn on their own! Second, Waltz's idiosyncratic reading of Rousseau as an exemplar of early realism. Third, the path from this text to his masterpiece, "The Theory of International Politics". Given Waltz's skewering of theorizing from the first image (man's problematic nature) and second image (regime type and behavior), the path is made clear to his systems-level approach. On the whole this book is an enjoyable read, but hardly an intellectual tour-de-force.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent text.
Review: Written as a doctoral thesis some 45 years ago, Kenneth Waltz's MAN, THE STATE AND WAR continues to be a staple in the field of international relations theory. Waltz's groundbreaking piece is a thorough analysis of the difficulties associated with the war-peace continuum. Through his exhaustive research of some noted theorists such as Thucydides, Morgenthau and others, Waltz articulates the need to look beyond the individual and state level causes of war, and look to the system for the answers. MAN, THE STATE AND WAR continues the tradition of realism through its emphasis of a state centric system and by analysing the field of international politics through power arrangements. Where Waltz goes beyond the classical realist is through his assertion of the importance of systemic influences in international politics. His later work, THEORY OF INTRENATIONAL POLITICS is a much more indepth analysis into the need for a structural theory of politics, however this piece lays the groundwork for all other material. For students of international politics, or for those who are interested in deeper questions as to why world politics sometimes does not seem to make much sense, Waltz will provide you with some answers in an articulate and interesting fashion. Despite its relative age, it still bears reading today.