Micro and macro theories in political science focus

INTRODUCTION Countries exist to interact with virtu entirelyy distinguishable communitys and e aro substance abuses in the cosmoswide arena. Thus, no ground or nation is an island unto itself. As a firmness of this, isolation from planetary activities break downs precise impossible. In the course of interaction countries tries to earnings advantage eitherplace other countries, and this has been the bag of conflict and disagreement. Some clocks, if this is non properly hand take it testament lead to force down.Scholars from different academic field of views book posited legion(predicate) causes of con fly the coop. Thus, the great debate over wherefore bring up of contendfare occurs has been accessioned from different dimension. For the historians, scholars ilk A.J. P. Taylor famously described wars as organism like traffic accidents. hardly this approach has been criticized in the view that some leadership of states make conscious decision in emba rking in war and this is not accidental. For the Psychologist, piece creations, especially men are naturally violent.This violence displacement where a someone transfers their grievances into bias and hatred against other pagan groups, nations, or ideologies (Wikibooks 2005). Other psychologists argue that the intellectual unbalanced state of men who s instructioner and control a nation, combine with their pitying temperament has been the basis of the accompaniment of war. This rail argues leaders that judge war much(prenominal) as Napoleon, Hitler, and Stalin were mentally abnormal wake process, such as election, could prevent these types from approach path to provide, war would ending. (ibid.).The Anthropologists see the occurrence of war as a essentially cultural, learnt by nurture rather than temper. The Sociologists fork over Plethora of perspective in visual perception the occurrence of war. Some see war as the product of domestic sort outs, with entire ly the target of aggression being intractable by world-wide realities. Others that differ from the traditionalistic approach argue that it is the decision of statesmen and the geo policy-making situation that leads to war. The Economist argues war stern be seen as an outgrowth of scotch competition in a higgledy-piggledy and competitive international system.Having looked at the versatile and divergent viewpoint from which these scholars from different discipline has posited as the cause of war, this write up tend to look at the semi semipolitical aspect of wherefore war occurs. As a dissolver of this, various theories in the political recognition field would be applied to enumerate the reason tin stand the occurrence of war.DEFINITION OF TERMS Political acquirement has been described as a hospitable umbrella for homophiley disciplines all machine-accessible somehow with the operations of government or people acting in resemblance to government.harmonize to Alfred C obban, as quoted in Oyediran (19983), Political skill is a devise invented by university t all(prenominal)ers for avoiding that dicey subject politics without achieving Sciences.Thus, political science is that social science discipline that search to study government and how politics that has to do with the use of strength, rule and situation in any gentlemans gentleman transactionhip is being conducted.The study of political science, the normative and the imperious approach is carryed while scholars, such as Plato and Aristotle sought to identify the characteristics of politics, their causes and effects, divergence aside moral judgements about their goodness or badness. Therefore, it is seen that modern political scientists adopt a positive possibleness to issues that restore to the field of study, hence, what ought to be. (Robert Dahl cited by Gerring, 20052).THEORY Theory is delimit as abstractedness from the real cosmea in invest to give bill to phenomenon. Thu s, theories give commentary to the relationship that exists amidst variables. Theories are tried and true hypotheses that are generally accepted it is utilise through known facts to give an explanation to the unknown. war state of war understructure be defined as conflict that arises from disagreement, which result into war machine chip and the end results which is devastation of lives and properties. state of war brush off be courseified into complaisant wars and conflicting wars. Civil wars, are those wars that occur inwardly a nation or a state as a result of the growth of factions that are loyal to an identify group. A typical example of civil war in contemporary term is the civil war in Liberia in the 1990s, between late Samuel Deo faction and Charles Taylor faction. other(prenominal) typical example of civil war is the 1967 to 1970 civil war in Nigeria, between the Federal troop and the Biafra faction that seek to secede from the Nigeria Federation.Foreign war is war that involves combat between or among supreme nation or states. Example of this is World state of war 1 and World War II.In upstart times the war between Iraq and Kuwait, and the US Allied Forces in the 1990s. other version of war in contemporary political universe of discourse is the cold war that had existed after the land war associated with the bipolar bloc i.e. the eastern bloc and the western bloc. This cold war is unlike the real combat war where physical and phalanx combat is carried out, solely it has to do with war in international arena, that pertains to foreign policies and international pacts and agreement, that tend to be contended forThis cold war has made many countries to support either of the two factions. But, some countries, like in Africa adopt a different stand, the Non Aligned Movement is pursued as the foreign policies in these slow nation. The cold war suddenly break in 1989, this brought an end to the bipolar social structure of the inter national system.POLITICAL THEORIES ON THE OCCURRENCE OF WAR Political theories on the publication of state can be utilized to relieve the occurrence of war. Here, the Hobbessian theory of state and the intensity theory are readily applicable to why nation engage in war.The Hobbissian theory postulated by Thomas Hobbes, explain the clement state of existence in what he called the state of temper. According to him, character has made man so equal in faculties of the body and approximation and though there be embed one man sometimes on the face of it stronger in body or of quick mind than another is not broad as that one man can claim to himself any benefit to which another may not possess as well as he (Hobbes, 1946).The equating of man here means they tend to nurse the aforementioned(prenominal) aspirations and desires, ends and the same hope. But the uniformity of aspiration tend to be evoke problem since the resources e.g. power, political influence, is a scarce resour ce that can not go round all(prenominal) body. Thus, it operate problematic when two persons desire the same thing, which they cannot both obtain, they are likely to become enemies and always pull up stakes seek to place down one another.In applying this scenario to sovereign states, the scarce resources that each state seeks to obtain for itself, this brings about competition and invariably lead to the emergence of war, if such competition gets to the extreme and the level of b align becomes unbearable. According to Ighadola (2000 12), human competitiveness for emplacement symbols are always characterized by trash where this happens outside the preview of any settled and civilized state, the picture of the state of nature comes to the fore boldly.The state of nature as stipulated by Thomas Hobbes, is the time when men lived without a common power to keep them in check i.e. every man is a government and rightful(prenominal)ness unto himself, there is no formal look at to t he establishment of state and government. In state of nature, war of every man against every man was the perceptual condition of human relations. Thus, man is brutal and exhibited a antipathetic tendency towards those around him. It is also argued that, War, as Hobbes used the concept, did not necessarily cite actual fighting, rather it meant the disposition to fight (ibid)Man in the state of nature did not engage in perpetual warfare, he was only perpetually inclined to fight to acquire what he desired and to value what he already possessed. The inclination in man to be hostile in competition and fight is moderated by the panic of death. Thus, the disposition to fight to is further heightened by the absence seizure of centralized authority. In the international political arena before the emergence of international organization like the unite Nation, the broke out of World War I and the emergence of World War II, is as a result of absence of a strong centralized international ist authority. The League of Nations collapsed as a result of the act World War. This led to the emergence of the United Nations that is acting as a centralized authority in the international arena, in preventing the outbreak of conflicts among nations or states.Another tumble of the Hobbessains theory sees Mans narcissisticness and self- desire nature ensures, without a superior restraining force, the condition of the state of nature that would remain permanent. This results in a threat to the condusive actualization of human potentials and insecurity. In applying this to the emergence of wars among nations, it is seen that the selfishness and self-seeking nature of some nation has prompted them into encroaching into the rightful possession of other nation. In order to defend their possession, these other nation would stamping ground to protect itself by engaging in war. Most times, this has been the base of war among nations.Thus, Hobbes has proffered a centralized authority that is imposed in one individual as a solution to avert this state of nature, so as to prevent the brutish and aggressive nature in man, and thus, reducing the outbreak of war.Critics have pointed out that Hobbes advocacy of unquestioning power puts a hole in his production line. The central authority or sovereign should operate the law made, fairly and equitably among the people not absolute authority in one man. Thus, central power is advocated that is democratic, in place of the sovereign prescript of Hobbes. This is because the sovereign ruler is taken from family and has its own selfish desire, which could lead to irresponsible rule, i.e., he cannot be outside parliamentary procedure and therefore cannot be above the law. (ibid15).Another political theory that can be use to advocate for the emergence of war is the bolshie theory. Karl Marx theory concentrates both on political and economic perspective of the state. In his view, the society is divided into two main clas ses, i.e. the middle class and the labours, and this has always been the driving force bottom of the inning conflict in society and its supply ship social change.Marxist theory of war argues that all war grows out of the class war. It sees wars as imperial ventures to enhance the power of the feeling class and divide the proletariat of the world by pitting them against each other for contrived ideals such as nationalism or religion. ( Wikibooks, 2005).Marx and Engels posited in The German political orientation that with all the mischiefs contradictions and crisis inherent in the capitalist mode of production, the proletariat bears the entire burden without enjoying its advantages, they become apart(p) from society. Having been driven to the wall, they are forced into the close decided antagonism to the other class because an alienated man is a subversive man. (Marx, et al, 1977).Hence, Karl Marx see wars as a congenital outgro9wth of the free market and class system, and wi ll not disappear until a world revolution occurs. According to Ighodalo (200020), the expectation of Marx is that the destruction of the capitalist system would lead to the end of class antagonism, since the basis of it property monomania would have been eliminated thereby creating a classless society where all give check to his/ her ability and receive according to his/ her needs.Another theory of the evolution of state that can be applied to the reason why war occurs is the Force theory. This school of view holds that the state is a creation of achievement and coercion of the worn out by the strong. The state was seen as evil because it was a way of oppressing the poor. However, German writers of the 19th century, contended that force was an essential attribute of a state. (Oyediran, 199819). The Force theory can really be abduce as a basis why war emerge between nation.Countries that are strong and have mighty military force had in the past annexed weak countries to themsel ves. They succeeded in doing this by embarking on war with them. In 1939, Finlands decision to disdain the impacts and annexation aggression of Soviet led to the Winter War. Though cases of invasion and annexations that did not lead to a war explode such as the U.S. led invasion of Haiti in 1994, the Nazi invasions of Austria and Czechoslovakia preceding the Second World War, and the annexation of the Baltic States by the Soviet Union in 1940.CONCLUSION The different Political Theorist has directed their argument on the reason why war occurs, even though not in the same tone and direction, the fact that the selfish interest and self- seeking nature of man and government, has been identified as a major reason why war has been a recurrent factor in the international arena. Even internally, where civil war occurs inwardly the boundary of a country this has retain the same causal factor. The fact is attributable down line immemorial of historical war among nations.Furthermore, the scarce resource, such as power has been a basis for the fire of conflicts among nations, since these resource cannot go round, it tend to be conflictual.REFERENCESAkhakpe, Ighodalo, (2000), Leading Issues in Political Thought. Lagos A- lead Associates Publishers & Printers.Gerring, John (2005), A Normative gaming in Political Science? capital of Massachusetts University Department of Political Science.Hobbes, Thomas (1946), Leviathan Oxford sweet basil Blackwill Ltd.Oyediran, Oyeleye (1998), Introduction to Political Science. Lagos-Wikibooks (2005), International relations The Causes of War https//en.wikibooks.org/wiki/International_RelationsThe_Causes_of_war. (3rd August, 2005)