A growing body of critical and reflexive international relations (IR) realism
draws on the work of Hans Morgenthau. While not without merit, I argue that
these appropriations rely on selective – perhaps even wishful
– readings of Morgenthau’s work: the reflexivity that he
calls for, I argue, is not matched by what his theory
actually delivers. Raising that distinction, I then trace
out its consequences for contemporary critical and reflexive IR realists, in two
steps. First, I identify similar reflexive shortcomings in recent work by
neoclassical realist Randall Schweller. These, I suggest, point to abiding
challenges to which contemporary critical/reflexive realism must prove itself
equal. I then survey the notions of reflexivity at work in the
critical/reflexive realism of Michael C. Williams and Richard Ned Lebow. Do they
go far enough? Do they answer those challenges? I conclude by arguing that
Morgenthau’s legacy for critical and reflexive realism should be
reconsidered: properly understood, his work signals an impasse that is general
to IR as a discipline. Signaling the depth of that impasse constitutes a lasting
legacy, with which critical/reflexive realists have not yet dealt
adequately.
