Here’s Where Jeffrey Sachs and John Mearsheimer Disagree
Summary
TLDRThe speaker contrasts their views with John Mearsheimer's realist perspective on international relations, which he sees as inevitably tragic due to anarchic power struggles. Instead, they argue for the possibility and necessity of international cooperation, citing Mearsheimer's accurate predictions on US-Russia and US-China relations. They emphasize the benefits of trade and the urgent need for global collaboration on environmental challenges. The speaker also highlights the unique threat of thermonuclear war, asserting that we cannot afford another tragedy in this age.
Takeaways
- 🌐 The speaker believes in the possibility and importance of international cooperation despite the anarchic nature of the international system.
- 📚 They differ from John Mearsheimer's view that tragedy is inevitable in international relations, advocating for a more optimistic perspective on global cooperation.
- 👍 The speaker credits Mearsheimer for his accurate predictions on US foreign policy towards Russia and China, acknowledging his influence in international relations theory.
- 🔮 Mearsheimer's prediction of US-China relations turning hostile due to China's growth has been proven accurate over the past two decades.
- 🚫 The speaker rejects the notion of tragedy as the inevitable outcome of international relations, arguing for the potential of positive global cooperation.
- 🌱 As an economist, the speaker emphasizes the benefits of trade and the interconnectedness of the world, which is essential for addressing global challenges.
- 🌍 The world is seen as inevitably interconnected on crucial issues like environmental sustainability, biodiversity, and climate change, necessitating global cooperation.
- ⚠️ The speaker highlights the unique threat of thermonuclear weapons, arguing that the stakes of international conflict have never been higher and that we cannot afford another global tragedy.
- 💡 There is a strong emphasis on the need for global cooperation to prevent the literal annihilation of our species in the age of thermonuclear weapons.
- 🏙️ The speaker draws parallels between local cooperation in neighborhoods, cities, and states to argue that similar cooperation can and should be applied on a global scale.
Q & A
What is the speaker's view on the nature of the international system?
-The speaker believes that peace and international cooperation are vital and achievable, contrasting with John Mearsheimer's view of an anarchic international system where tragedy is inevitable.
How does the speaker describe John Mearsheimer's perspective?
-The speaker describes Mearsheimer's perspective as one that sees international relations as anarchic, leading to inevitable struggles for dominance among great powers, which he terms a 'tragedy of great power politics.'
What are the key predictions made by John Mearsheimer mentioned in the script?
-Two key predictions mentioned are: 1) US foreign policy towards Russia, particularly regarding Ukraine, would lead to confrontation, and 2) the relationship between the US and China would turn hostile as China grows.
What is the speaker's stance on the concept of tragedy in international relations?
-The speaker rejects the notion of tragedy as the inevitable state of affairs, arguing that cooperation is possible and that there are many examples of cooperation in various levels of society.
What economic principle does the speaker emphasize?
-The speaker emphasizes the principle of great gains from trade, rooted in economic thinking since Adam Smith's 'The Wealth of Nations,' advocating for a more interconnected world.
What are the profound challenges the speaker believes necessitate global cooperation?
-The speaker identifies challenges such as the survival of oceans, biodiversity, ecosystems, and the physical environment as critical issues that require global cooperation.
How does the speaker view the implications of the thermonuclear age?
-The speaker views the thermonuclear age as a time when humanity is at risk of self-destruction, emphasizing the need to avoid further tragedies due to the potential for annihilation.
What historical tragedies does the speaker reference to support their argument?
-The speaker references World War I, World War II, and the Thirty Years' War as examples of past tragedies that highlight the importance of avoiding similar outcomes in the current context.
How does the speaker's view differ from Mearsheimer's regarding international cooperation?
-The speaker believes that cooperation is not only possible but essential, while Mearsheimer views the anarchic nature of international relations as leading to conflict and tragedy.
What does the speaker suggest about the interconnectedness of the world?
-The speaker suggests that the world is inevitably interconnected, especially regarding significant global challenges, and that this interconnectedness necessitates cooperation rather than anarchy.
Outlines
🌍 International System and Cooperation
The speaker discusses their view on the nature of the international system, contrasting it with John Mearsheimer's view of it as anarchic. They express a preference for not using labels and emphasize the importance of peace and international cooperation as achievable goals. They admire Mearsheimer's work, particularly his predictions about US-Russia relations concerning Ukraine and the future hostility between the US and China. However, they fundamentally disagree with the idea that tragedy is inevitable in international relations, arguing for the possibility and necessity of cooperation. The speaker, an economist, also highlights the benefits of trade and the interconnectedness of the world, especially regarding global challenges such as environmental preservation. They stress the urgency of cooperation in the thermonuclear age to avoid self-destruction, viewing it as a serious threat to humanity.
🚫 Avoiding Tragedy in the Thermonuclear Age
This paragraph continues the discussion on the potential for tragedy in international relations, particularly in the context of the thermonuclear age. The speaker argues that past tragedies, which Mearsheimer could explain well, should not be repeated due to the unique dangers of the current era. They assert that in the thermonuclear age, the stakes are higher, and the potential for global catastrophe is much greater, making it imperative to avoid another tragedy.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Anarchic
💡Peace
💡International Cooperation
💡Tragedy
💡Great Powers
💡Zero Sum Game
💡Predictions
💡Trade
💡Interconnectedness
💡Thermomuclear Age
💡Self-Destruction
Highlights
The speaker doesn't like labels because they oversimplify complex issues.
Peace and international cooperation are vital and achievable.
Differences with John Mearsheimer's view on the inevitability of tragedy in international relations.
John Mearsheimer's prediction about US-Russia relations and Ukraine was accurate.
Mearsheimer's prediction about the future of US-China relations turned out to be correct.
The speaker believes that cooperation is possible and vital, contrary to Mearsheimer's tragic view.
Cooperation is evident in local communities and can be applied globally.
Economic gains from trade are deeply embedded in economic thinking.
The world is inevitably interconnected on profoundly important challenges.
The need for cooperation on environmental challenges due to human activity.
The speaker rejects the idea of anarchy prevailing in the face of global challenges.
The dawn of the thermonuclear age has changed the stakes of international relations.
The potential for literal annihilation of our species is a serious concern.
The speaker believes we cannot afford another tragedy in the thermonuclear age.
The speaker emphasizes the importance of avoiding tragedy due to the unique risks of our time.
Transcripts
what is your view of the nature of the
International System for example someone
like John mimer views it as anarchic
what is your conception well as you can
probably guess I don't love labels
because I think that they oversimplify
so I like to describe things either in
paragraphs or articles or books but
basically I believe that peace and
international cooperation are vital and
achievable and the differ
between me and John mimer who I admire
enormously and like very much as an
individual and like as a personal friend
is that he believes that in the anarchic
relations of governments tragedy is
inevitable his great text is called the
tragedy of great power politics and his
view is that because there is so much in
Security in an anarchic World great
powers are bound not only to jostle with
each other but to struggle for dominance
and if two are struggling for dominance
one wins and one loses the setup is a
zero sum or I would say a negative sum
game in fact the title tragedy suggests
a negative some game where the struggle
goes on and in some sense there a
disaster ensues
so he believes that I believe that
cooperation is possible and vital John
gets a lot of credit in my view for
accurate predictions uh and I can
mention several but two that I would
mention are his predictions that US
foreign policy Visa Russia and
specifically in Ukraine would lead us to
frontation he gets a lot of credit for
that because he was very clear on that
point in 2014 and has been clear on that
ever since and he also made a prediction
which is in a way even more powerful
that back in 20012 2002 when his great
book was published he said the relations
between the US and China are benign but
as China continues to grow they will
develop into
hostility and if you would asked me back
then 20 years ago I would have said ah
come on John there's no reason for that
hostility and 20 years later his
prediction was accurate so I give him a
lot of predictive credit but where we
really differ is that I can't accept
personally tragedy as being the State of
Affairs and the inevitable outcome I
think we can do better than that and
certainly there is a lot of cooperation
in the world in our own immediate lives
in our neighborhoods and our cities and
our states and our nation and I believe
that that can apply globally as well
another point though as an economist uh
where I take exception to this is on two
essential points one is that I believe
that there are great gains from trade so
that's pretty deeply embedded in
economic thinking it goes back in its
clearest initial statement to Adam Smith
in 1776 in The Wealth of Nations but
it's proved in innumerable theories and
empirical studies ever since so I want
the world to be interconnected because I
think it is good but a second point is I
believe the world is inevitably
interconnected
on profoundly important challenges such
as the survival of our oceans our
biodiversity our ecosystems our physical
environment which is being deeply
deranged by the scale of human activity
now over a hundred trillion dollars per
year scale of activity and we need to
cooperate we're not in a position toow
allow Anarchy to prevail there's one
even more important point and that is
that ever since the dawn of the
thermonuclear age and one could argue
ever since the dawn of the atomic age in
1945 but certainly since the dawn of
thermonuclear weapons we are trapped on
the edge of
self-destruction literal annihilation of
our species I take that very seriously
so so while we've had tragedies in the
past World War I World War II the 30
Years War innumerable tragedies that
John mimer could explain very very well
I believe we can't afford yet another
tragedy of this kind because in the
thermonuclear age everything is
different
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
How do American universities make their money? | Counting the Cost
马股投资 | 马股失去上涨动力,六穷即将开始?热潮来袭,机会在这行业!#马股 #马股分析 #马股投资 #股票 #股票分析 #技术分析
Saudi Arabia's Threat: Europe in Shock | India Gain's Billion Dollars from Russia-Ukraine War!!!
Meet the Author: Tim Marshall
Realism vs. Liberalism - Global Politics Theories Compared
Top Taiwan Hosts SOUND OFF ON War w/China, Pelosi Visit, Free Speech
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)