The Most Influential of All International Relations Theories: Classical Realism
To understand Classical Realism, one should, nevertheless, define what Realism stands for and how significantly it shapes IR.
Realism is the oldest and the most influential of all International Relations theories that emerged in the 2oth century and managed to dominate the field until the end of the Cold War. Realism is a state-centric approach that emphasizes the significance of Anarchy and the rivalry for power among states. Accordingly, Realists consider the state to be the main actor in the international arena.
Classical Realism mainly represents an approach to International Relations that dates back to fifth-century Greek historian Thucydides and his narrative of the Peloponnesian War. Classical Realism has demonstrated a fundamental unity of thought across a span of nearly 2.500 years. The principal advocates of Classical Realism are Thucydides, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Hans J. Morgenthau, who were predominantly concerned with questions of order, justice, and change.
Classical Realists take a negative view of human nature. Accordingly, they see people as inherently selfish and worried about themselves and their own protection and safety. Besides, concepts such as the balance of power and the security dilemma are considered to be the main systematic instruments of the Realist tradition. According to Classical Realists, people want to dominate and conquer. Consequently, everyone is born with a will to power hardwired in them. Violence, conflict, insecurity, and mutual suspicion arise because of our inherent selfishness. To sum up, the Classical Realists' main concepts and ideas include state-centric, self-centred, and pessimistic approaches to International Relations.
References:
Campbell, C., 2003. Morgenthau's Cold War. In: Glimmer for a new Leviathan. Columbia University Press, pp. 54-73.
Lebow, R. N., 2016.2. Classical Realism. In: International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. 4th Edition. Oxford University Press, p. 34.