{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027848101265822784, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0037974683544303796, 'mean_word_length': 5.228346456692913, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Concept of "Realism" as a Source of Confusion

The discussion of international politics remains preoccupied with a construct called "realist theory". In this article it is first shown that there is confusion in the literature about the substantive contents of "realist theory" and that the thoughts ascribed to this theory tend to be ambiguous, inconsistent, or trivial. It is then argued that three fundamental concerns of international politics theory, which are commonly considered in terms of realism versus idealism, are easier to comprehend if we rid ourselves of this burden and discuss them in their own terms. The three theoretical issues are (1) the explanatory power of anarchy, (2) the immutability of international politics, and (3) the amorality of international politics.