Blog Post #1 Bryan Pfeffer

Bryan Pfeffer

Prof. Shirk

Blog Post 1

            Imagine a world where the states we had today ceased to exist completely. Instead, taking their place, the teams of the National Football League became the states. It stands to logic, then, that the biggest story nationally would be one of the many scandals that have taken place in the recent past involving physical violence against women and children. I’m choosing to focus on Ray Rice, and his domestic violence case. I will take a brief look into three schools of thought, and how they would choose to handle the Baltimore Ravens’ situation.

            First, the realist. Given his constructs about relative power rather than absolute power, a realist would argue that the Baltimore Ravens cannot punish their running back severely as they play in a very tough and competitive AFC North division. Therefore, their relative power is going to be very affected by the absence of Rice. Second, the realist would say that the opinions and actions of groups outside the state have no affect on the decision. If anti-domestic violence groups were to protest to the Raven’s lack of punishment upon Rice, the realist would not consider that a factor in decision making, because actors besides the state are not relevant. Finally, the realist may be concerned that other states may not comply with a similar punishment for players in similar situations. If they severely punish their player, and a player in another state commits a similar offense, there is no way of knowing that the state will punish that player accordingly. This is a condition of anarchy and leads to acting in the state’s best self-interest. For these reasons, the realist is pushing to see Ray Rice back out on the field.

            Next, the liberal. The liberal is less concerned with relative power and instead more concerned with absolute power. While the relative power of the area is great, the absolute power (the AFC, and NFL as a whole) is not as competitive, and thus the punishment of Rice diminishes their absolute power less than their relative. Also, the liberal sees interstate relations as motivated by actors rather than just states alone, and may feel the pressure of groups against domestic violence or international governance (the commissioner) to impose a penalty upon Rice. Interdependence is another key to liberalism, and the Ravens may not be able to maintain good relations with other states (for trades) if they let Rice walk away unpunished. Despite these things, as mentioned earlier, absolute power is important, and thus the liberal knows they will need Rice especially come playoff time. The liberal may suggest a lengthy, but not indefinite, suspension.

            Finally, the constructivist. Since the National Football League (our hypothetical international system) is in the USA, we will assume that its constructs stem from here. Receiving serious punishment for domestic violence is an important ideal of the United States, and that social construct would lead to a demand for a serious punishment for Rice. The community, a key player in international politics in the mind of a constructivist, would opt for a heavy punishment to mitigate future domestic violence. An indefinite suspension from the Baltimore Ravens would be an adequate punishment in the eyes of the constructivist (using American social norms and constructs).

            Alas, international relations did not come into play in the decision to suspend Ray Rice indefinitely, as the decision belonged to commissioner Roger Goodell. In our hypothetical world, though, there would be some intriguing debate amongst IR theorists in the state of the Baltimore Ravens on how to handle the Ray Rice controversy.