How can a fictional political world help readers understand competing international-relations theories?
A closer account of the question, evidence, and how to interpret this work.
The 2019 book coauthored with Ñusta Carranza Ko begins by establishing levels of analysis and definitions of power, then uses Game of Thrones to illustrate how different international-relations theories interpret the same kinds of strategic situations. A threat can be understood as a response to systemic insecurity, institutional incentives, identity commitments, or competing political orders.
The publisher’s contents identify chapters on realism, liberalism, critical identity perspectives, human rights, and Indigenous peoples. This combination moves beyond the familiar question of which family will win a war. It asks readers to consider cooperation, norms, rights violations, hierarchy, and the perspectives of groups who do not control the central institutions of power.
A narrative supplies recognizable decisions, rivalries, and consequences that can expose differences among theories. It does not constitute independent evidence about real states. The book’s value lies in disciplined comparison: holding a political scenario in view while asking what one theory explains that another misses. It is a scholarly interpretive book distinct from the coauthored journal article on running a semester-long simulation.
Source: Young and Carranza Ko, Game of Thrones and the Theories of International Relations, Lexington Books (2019); publisher description and contents.
Literary examples illustrate theories but do not prove empirical propositions about real states. This book is distinct from the authors' article about teaching with a simulation.
Published academic book · 2019 · Laura D. Young and Ñusta Carranza Ko · Lexington Books.