Acceso usuarios
Villanueva de la Cañada, España
A revisionist state is one pursuing a subversive policy over the status quo and trying to implement its vision in the new world order to come. This basic statement that can easily be found in the current literature on revisionism is far from neutral. The problems when defining revisionism, the status quo to be disrupted, or the motivations of the revisionist actor have impeded a full comprehension of the phenomenon. The penetration of this ambiguous term in Trump’s rhetoric obliges the discipline to examine closely the treatment that revisionism has received in the literature and the nuances that have been omitted with the lapse of time. This paper performs this task in two ways: firstly, by underlining all the difficulties when dealing with revisionism in International Relations to create a multi-programme foundation for the discussion, and then by going back to Classical Realism to examine how revisionism was first drafted and treated by the literature. This choice of Classical Realism responds to its role as the first research programme discussing revisionism. Therefore, a theoretical review has been performed using the works by Schuman, Carr, Schwarzenberger, Morgenthau, Kissinger, Organski and Aron to understand the evolution of Classical Realism. Thanks to this, three phases (coining, stigmatization, and deconstruction) are identified, and several conclusions are drawn about the rights and wrongs of Classical Realism when dealing with revisionism, which have penetrated the following literature due to reductionist interpretations of such a complex phenomenon. This field of research should be a priority of International Relations Theory in the coming years to undo past mistakes and ensure the clarity of the terms coined and used in the academia and in international politics in general.
