what does realism explain best and what does it miss?

what does liberalism explain best and what does it miss?
what does radicalism best explain and what does it miss?
what does Constructivism best explain and what does it miss?

1. Go to http://www.google.com or http://www.bing.com

2. Type in realism (or whatever search terms you need). Press Enter.

3. Read different search results until you find what you need.

4. Re-search with the different search terms.

Realism, liberalism, radicalism, and constructivism are different theories in the field of international relations that aim to explain and analyze various aspects of the world.

1. Realism:
Realism is a theory that emphasizes power, competition, and self-interest as key drivers of state behavior. It explains international relations based on the assumption that states are the primary actors and that they engage in politics to ensure their own survival and security. Realism is often considered to explain best the dynamics of conflict and competition between states, as well as the pursuit of military power and national interests. It highlights the importance of balance of power and the role of military force in shaping global politics.

However, realism tends to overlook factors such as human rights, ethics, and cooperation among states. It pays less attention to non-state actors, transnational issues, and the potential for collaboration on global challenges such as climate change or pandemics. Realism also disregards the potential for peaceful resolution of conflicts and downplays the importance of international institutions and norms.

2. Liberalism:
Liberalism, as a theory, places greater emphasis on cooperation, interdependence, and the role of institutions in international relations. It explains best the benefits of economic integration, democratic governance, and the protection of individual rights. Liberalism highlights the potential for cooperation, international law, and diplomacy to address global challenges and promote peace.

However, liberalism may overlook the power dynamics between states and the inequalities that persist in the international system. It tends to assume that states share similar values and interests, which might not be the case. Liberalism may also underestimate the role of non-state actors and the complex dynamics of identity politics in shaping international relations.

3. Radicalism:
Radicalism, also known as Marxism or Critical Theory, analyzes international relations through a socio-economic and class-based perspective. It places emphasis on the unequal distribution of resources, exploitation, and the pursuit of economic interests as central drivers of global politics. Radicalism explores best the structural factors that shape the international system, such as imperialism, capitalism, and inequality.

However, radicalism often overlooks the complexity of political decision-making and the agency of state and non-state actors. It may downplay the significance of non-economic factors, like culture or ideology, in shaping international relations. Radicalism can also be limited in its ability to explain the emergence of new global issues that transcend traditional economic determinants.

4. Constructivism:
Constructivism focuses on the role of ideas, norms, and social constructs in international relations. It explains best how shared beliefs, identities, and perceptions shape state behavior and the international system. Constructivism highlights the importance of social interactions, discourse, and the power of norms and values in shaping international relations.

However, constructivism may struggle to provide clear causal explanations for state behavior and can be criticized for lacking predictive capabilities. It might underestimate the role of material interests and power dynamics in international politics. Additionally, constructivism faces challenges in distinguishing between deeper, enduring norms and transient, situational discourses.