IR theorists often get the idea that they have some special expertise to comment about all sorts of topics, and pop culture is a regular fetish. One IR scholar published a book about the IR take on Harry Potter, with the peculiar twist that he himself looks like Harry Potter.
The latest attempt involves an analysis of a rapper battle between Jay Z, the reigning champ, as it were, and a young challenger, The Game. Although I admittedly don't know much about rap, I know a thing or two about IR, I take it as my duty to set the record straight. I doubt anybody will take the piece too seriously, but it might lead them to discounting IR too.
The author, Marc Lynch, is trying to make the argument that Jay Z is a classic great power faced with the problem of maintaining his status, and he seems to be trying to put a strong realist spin on it, but he misses the mark widely. His first peculiar observation is that neocons would tell Jay Z to use his power to bend others his way, and liberals and defensive realists would tell him to restrain his power. The intelligent thing to do is to realize that if you're in power, you're not the one with the problems, but you may not have that luxury forever. Randall Schweller would tell you that you should use your power, but you should do it investing in institutions that will provide you with a soft landing when power wanes. Other states will see you making rules that bind yourself too, and they might think you're more benevolent, or something.
Lynch also kept talking about Jay Z's constraints and how he wouldn't dare to do this or that. What the heck counts as power in this case and what does it cost? He's constrained only if he has a limited amount of resources, but what are these resources. Many real realists at least give good proxy measures for power like tanks, warm bodies, capital reserves, production capacity, etc. I can imagine how the tanks run out, but Jay Z seems to fight mostly by talking, and he seems to be able to do that forever.
There's also the account of how, after Jay Z reconciled with the preceding King of NY, "In a world of unipolarity, both win through co-optation, reconciliation through enemies, and the demonstration that the gains of cooperation outweigh the gains of resistance." Even when two parties to agree on the same course of action as the best for everyone, there is still often a debate about how to split the benefits. France and the UK both want cleaner water with more fish in the English Channel. No argument there. If they could achieve it, though, they might not agree on how to split the fish. There is rarely just one Pareto equilibrium, and they rarely split conveniently. (Thanks, Stephen Krasner.)
Two bizarre quotes:
The latest attempt involves an analysis of a rapper battle between Jay Z, the reigning champ, as it were, and a young challenger, The Game. Although I admittedly don't know much about rap, I know a thing or two about IR, I take it as my duty to set the record straight. I doubt anybody will take the piece too seriously, but it might lead them to discounting IR too.
The author, Marc Lynch, is trying to make the argument that Jay Z is a classic great power faced with the problem of maintaining his status, and he seems to be trying to put a strong realist spin on it, but he misses the mark widely. His first peculiar observation is that neocons would tell Jay Z to use his power to bend others his way, and liberals and defensive realists would tell him to restrain his power. The intelligent thing to do is to realize that if you're in power, you're not the one with the problems, but you may not have that luxury forever. Randall Schweller would tell you that you should use your power, but you should do it investing in institutions that will provide you with a soft landing when power wanes. Other states will see you making rules that bind yourself too, and they might think you're more benevolent, or something.
Lynch also kept talking about Jay Z's constraints and how he wouldn't dare to do this or that. What the heck counts as power in this case and what does it cost? He's constrained only if he has a limited amount of resources, but what are these resources. Many real realists at least give good proxy measures for power like tanks, warm bodies, capital reserves, production capacity, etc. I can imagine how the tanks run out, but Jay Z seems to fight mostly by talking, and he seems to be able to do that forever.
There's also the account of how, after Jay Z reconciled with the preceding King of NY, "In a world of unipolarity, both win through co-optation, reconciliation through enemies, and the demonstration that the gains of cooperation outweigh the gains of resistance." Even when two parties to agree on the same course of action as the best for everyone, there is still often a debate about how to split the benefits. France and the UK both want cleaner water with more fish in the English Channel. No argument there. If they could achieve it, though, they might not agree on how to split the fish. There is rarely just one Pareto equilibrium, and they rarely split conveniently. (Thanks, Stephen Krasner.)
Two bizarre quotes:
- on the rivalry of The Game vs. 50 Cent: "In that war between a rising power and an upper-echelon middle power, both ultimately benefited."
- on Jay Z's options: "If Jay Z hits back hard in public, the Game will gain in publicity even if he loses ... the classic problem of a great power confronted by a small and annoying challenger."
Okay, so WTF? What historical analogs does Lynch have in mind? When was it ever the case that two middling powers benefited from a war among themselves? They're much more likely to be swallowed up. Divide et impera. And if the problem of a weaker challenger gaining publicity is a classic one for a great power, when has it ever happened that way? Iraq gained a lot of publicity once by invading Kuwait, and it was not a very big problem for the US (to get Iraq out of Kuwait - not the rest). The publicity certainly doesn't help a middling power trying to amass resources and prepare an attack. He's just making this up as if everyone in IR would buy it. Bullsh!t.
Finally, there's Lynch's own council to Jay Z: "His best hope is probably to sit back and let the Game self-destruct..." This is appeasement! Appeasement is only contingently bad. It's a fine thing when the bad guys appease the good guys, but it doesn't always work that way. Ask Poland.
Finally, there's Lynch's own council to Jay Z: "His best hope is probably to sit back and let the Game self-destruct..." This is appeasement! Appeasement is only contingently bad. It's a fine thing when the bad guys appease the good guys, but it doesn't always work that way. Ask Poland.
