My biggest fear in the entire world, no joke, is an alien. Ever since I can remember, the mysterious extra terrestrials have been the very epitome of all things unknown. It is not that I am scared that they will be mean or I find them menacing because I know nothing about them. It is because they are unknown! There are no empirical studies with them. We have no idea how they would communicate with us or how they would react. So, let’s just call this situation A PRIORI or essentially the theoretical deduction, rather than the observation of our co-living… species? Things? See we have no idea! I think what we need is an ambassador. Someone to communicate with the aliens. Now if we utilized the different International Relations Theories(I guess now they could be “Inter-global Theories” I think the best way we would approach this was from a Constructivist point of view.
Why constructivist? Well for one thing, there aren’t really such strong preconceived notions as the other two. Realists would have a general because these aliens would be seen as, well as Hobbes so wonderfully puts it: SOLITARY, POOR, NASTY, BRUTISH, AND SHORT. So we should dominate them. Take it as you will. Because after all we are in a anarchic interglobal order with no checks and balances and although realism does not = militarism but here, this might be the most obvious form of dominance. A liberal ambassador would be interested in inter global trade. But why? I mean we don’t even know if the aliens have a form of trade like ours. So that leaves constructivism because honestly we don’t know. Remember, we are working with no previous experience with the aliens. Constructivism is all about situationalism. The epoch of time dictates social and cultural mores. Constructivists also believe that it takes hard work on both sides to sustain a good relationship. Our relationship with the aliens could progress into friendship, but there is an etiquette in this. I think Wendt’s article on ANARCHY IS WHAT STATES MAKE OF IT is completely applicable here. On page 404 he discusses the “mirror” and how “the self is a reflection of an actor’s socialization”(404). I love it when Wednt says “society would be impossible if people made decisions purely on the basis of worst-case possibilities. Instead most decisions are and should be made on the basis of probabilities”(404). In our situation, when the aliens come down, our ambassador should be very observant and open to what the aliens will do. If they come with open arms, we shall embrace them. If there is a possibility for attach, we should be on security and be cautious. We should illustrate our strength too. This is similar to Wendt’s paradigm on page 405. We are creating intersubjective meanings.
All in all, as Wendt says, “interaction rewards actors for holding certain ideas about each other and discourages them from holding others(405)” and this will “create a relatively stable self and other regarding the issue at stake in reaction(405). We could have something WONDERFUL with these aliens if we focus on communication and observe them. I have hope for our inter global communication. Cultures can be shared and through this osmosis of communication can we begin to understand each other. The shrouds of mystery can be cast and my fear will become comfort.