Can Realists Be Considered Amoral?

Global Issues Reflection Paper 1
Can realists be considered amoral? No, realists are not amoral but are grounded in consequentialist morality. What is consequentialist morality? Consequentialist morality is determining whether a decision can be considered morally right or wrong depending is the consequences are good or bad. How are realist and idealists different? Idealists are those that see the potential of good in every country and organization and would like to work together to solve an issue. Instead of ruling with a power, they would prefer to rule with morals. Despite how it sounds idealists do not view, their approach as unrealistic. Even though they would like to cooperate as a whole they do not object to the use of military power if there is no choice. They can be described as a group that supports the righteous and fight the villainous when a conflict begins

On the other hand, realists are those that agree power is what drives international politics. They are commonly viewed as strategists that focus on the good and bad of the situation at hand. Realists tend to concentrate more on motives and are more attuned to how often good motives can produce tragic results. Realists can be perceived as the power hogs as they love to make alliances that are powerful enough to scare off or defeat an enemy. A downfall to this that many might resent the realist countries because they feel oppressed which can lead to war. Who could be considered a bigger threat to security between China and Russia? According to Betts, China is the biggest threat to the US now. He explains how in the 1970s, China was not considered a threat and was made an ally of the US to combat against the Soviet Union. However now that the tables are turned and Russia is viewed as weak in the power balance. Realists are hoping the US able to achieve rapprochement with Russia to improve the balance of