Women and the Evolution of World Politics

Critical Response Paper: Fukuyama’s “Women and the Evolution of World Politics” Allison Brown International Relations Discussion 21 February 2020 1 Analytical Summary Francis Fukyama’s “Women and the Evolution of World Politics” published in 1998 in the Foreign Affairs journal discusses humankind’s primordial gendered behaviors and how arguably the innate biological behaviors that both gender’s possess still show themselves today on the foreign state and influence how individuals act in terms of international politics. Fukyama begins the paper by focusing on what he coins “Chimpanzee Politics”, during which he explains how the species struggles with inter-group violence and the behavioral difference between the genders of the animals. He then goes into detail on how the genders of the species interact in their troop and comes to the conclusion that, “ . . . female chimpanzees have relationships; male chimpanzees practice realpolitik.” 1 The author then relates this reference to individuals living in paleolithic hunter-gatherer societies and how the men in the society built their relationships out of practicality rather than ideological understanding or emotional connections as he suggests the women in the tribe formed their relations from. Fukyama then shifts his focus to what the majority of the paper argues; that biologically and through cultural adaptation, men are inherently more violent and aggressive than women. He claims that the patriarchy was a later invention rooted in either Western Jedeuo-Christian tradition or capitalism which replaced matriarchal societies with patriarchal norms. Fukyama concludes with thought with a clear statement that will carry into the future: “phenomena like aggression, violence, war, and intense competition for dominance in a status hierarchy are close associated with men than women.” 2 Throughout the next two sections: “The Return of Biology” and “Feminists and Power Politics”, Fukayama continues to build on his argument of men being inherently more aggressive than women through examples ranging from the traditional dichotomy of men and women in 1 Fukuyama, Francis. “Women and the Evolution of World Politics.” Foreign Affairs 77, no. 5 (1998) (p.25) 2 ibid. (p.27) 2 classic societies, and the notion that, “international politics are gendered, that is, run by men to serve male interests, and interpreted by other men, consciously and unconsciously, according to 3 male perspectives.” He then continues to discuss not only the possibility of a less violent female-run world but the implications it may have on how the globe would look regionally. Fukayama then moves into examples of women leaders relevant to the late 20th century ranging from the United Kingdom’s Margret Thatcher to Norway’s Gro Harlem Brundtland. The passage establishes how biology may guide some features of an individual's behavior but ultimately isn’t a person’s destiny or their only way to function. An example of this is Prime Minister Thatcher who served Queen Elizaebth II from 1979-1990, many regarded her as a woman who stirred the traditional British Government and defied gender norms. Often she is regarded as beating men at their own game with her methods. Fukayama determines the following from examples of Thatcher and other women politicians, “Masculine policies will still 4 be required, though not necessarily masculine leaders.” This excerpt is indeed correct because one can inference through other aspects of his work that biologically or culturally masculinity isn’t only established with male populations, but is capable and evident in women as well. Closing out the academic text, Fukayama returns to utilizing the animal kingdom as a reference in the section titled “Living like Animals?” in which he establishes that ultimately biology is a factor in how we behave, but it is not our destiny. The text also considers the argument that not everyone in a society can always win or achieve high standing because, “these [any given status hierarchy] are by definition zero-sum games in which every winner produces a loser.” 5 Independent Critical Analysis 3 ibid. (p.32) 4 ibid. (p.37) 5 ibid. (p.40) 3 1998 was over twenty-two years ago, although some references to female politicians and biological studies are dated, Fukyama made arguments and claims that are still relevant today and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Throughout the text he refers to male politicians (and men in general) as having more of a realist outlook in their political relationships and actions. As defined by the book and in-class lectures, a realist is a state or individual who often views the world in a slightly pessimistic way, assuming that others are out to get them, and that they live in a zero-sum environment. In “Women and the Evolution of World Politics” it is evident that the actions and behaviors of the male population that Fukuyama discusses strongly relate to the 3 Core Principles of International Relations: power/dominance, reciprocity, and identity. To begin, the core principle of power and dominance. This principle establishes that a power hierarchy is often created in groups of people and that there will always be someone who is at the top of a society. Additionally, these societies Fukyama discusses are often nationalistic and cooperation is based out of agression towards a common enemy, “Group solidarity is still based on aggression against other communities; social cooperation is undertaken to achieve 6 higher levels of organized violence.” As suggested by this quote, social cooperation occurs in order to achieve better organized violence, whereas with women in this context social cooperation occurs for betterment of a society and mutual benefits according to Fukyama. The second principle, reciprocity, would be lacking a female-led world, “ … A truly matriarchal world, then, would be less prone to conflict and more conciliatory and cooperative 7 than the one we inhabit now.” In the argument of the text, the idea that men in society are provided aid or charter a trade deal with reciprocal expectations from that group or state they gave something. 6 ibid. (p.39) 7 ibid. (p.33) 4 Lastly, identity. The notion that individuals in a society or a state needs to be a part of a shared community, and in some instances hold a position of leadership in their community. Fukayama uses works from feminist Jean Bethke Elshtain to explain what actions an individual would do to establish an indentity in their community, “the traditional dichotomy between the 8 male ‘just warrior’marching to war and the female ‘beautiful soul’ marching for peace …” These gender norms establish a precedent for male and females in a community alike. For men, their identity was based in violence and aggression, by Elshtain’s interpretation of this traditional dichotomy, if a man was unable to partake in conflict he didn’t fit the mold with the others in his community his identity suffered. 3 Discussion Questions: 1. Is a completely matriarchal society like Fukayama suggests even possible on Earth? 2. Do individuals, and politicians, regardless of their gender tend to act according to their biology/cultural background or conscious choices? 3. Are the 3 Core Principles more noticeable or dominant with one particular gender not only in politicas but generally in our society? 8 ibid. (p.33)