What are the differences between the “theories” (realism, liberalism and Marxism) vs the “approaches” (rational choice and constructivism) in international law? Is this distinction useful? Why or why not?

Questions:

Question 1: What are the differences between the “theories” (realism, liberalism and Marxism) vs the “approaches” (rational choice and constructivism) in international law? Is this distinction useful? Why or why not?

Question 2: Does rational choice theory seem like a good way to understand international law? How much a constructivist approach criticize rational-choice?

Question 3: Which of the three theories (liberalism, realism, and Marxism) is most optimistic about international law? Which is most pessimistic and why?’