Talk:Offensive realism

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge with Realism (international relations)[edit]

Oppose merger - it's a distinct, complex, and influential form of realism that, like defensive realism, deserves its own article. Best possibility would be to expand this article to include more of the theory in Mearsheimer rather than to merge it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.105.246 (talk) 00:51, 9 March 2007‎ (UTC)[reply]

Accept merger - Offensive realism is, as the previous author notes, a form of realism. Therefore, logic dictates that it should be integrated into the whole. Coalescing all the intellectual offshoots and mutations of realism will allow readers to get a better grasp of scope and scholarly contributions to this research program within the international relations literature. Essentially, it is one-stop shopping in which readers can access the survey of literature on this topic within one article without being diverted to multiple sections that discuss interconnected parts of the same phenomenon.

How about both...[edit]

I agree with both the points of view represented. Offensive Realism is a complex philosophy that deserves a page to itself where the assumptions and implications of the theory can be explained in-depth. However, it would also be useful to have a broad outline of all types of realism in one page. Someone new to the subject should only have to go to one page to get a basic education in human nature and structural realism (including both the offensive and defensive schools). Cptneutrino 20:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Small additions[edit]

I am going to add Mearsheimer's five basic assumptions, it is a critical and simple component of the theory. I don't have the book with me at the moment, so I can't cite the page number but I will come back and do so as soon as possible. Cptneutrino 20:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something that needs to be addressed[edit]

I am a Political Science Masters student, and to be quite honest, not one reputable Political Scientist in the field agrees with Mr. Mearsheimers theory of Offensive Realism. I think there should be some mention of this universal peer rejection in the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.175.80.122 (talk) 01:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heller's essay[edit]

This is some undergrad senior essay, which doesn't actually get mentioned in the article itself. It looks almost as if it were inserted by the author or a colleague, rather than serving to help understand Mearshimer's theory. I would say it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.60.119 (talk) 17:30, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Done. Rlove (talk) 14:16, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Link to 'revisionism' in international relations[edit]

The article starts with using the term revisionism, which links to the broader concept of reform. Would it not be an improvement to link to Revisionist state? Youngrubby (talk) 22:18, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]