Mental Growth-Based Realism in Geopolitics

March 3, 2025 Sociocultural Issues No Comments

Conventional realism in international relations assumes that nations act primarily out of fear and survival, competing for dominance in a landscape of limited trust. Whether through offensive realism, which sees power maximization as the key to security, or defensive realism, which favors careful power balancing, the fundamental belief remains the same: power struggles are inevitable.

But what if this assumption is flawed? What if the power-based view of geopolitics is not realism in the truest sense but rather a self-perpetuating mental framework that can be evolved? To fully grasp this blog, please first read Ethics of Control vs. Ethics of Growth.

Mental Growth-Based Realism

This is a new perspective that sees international relations as deeply shaped by perception, identity, and cultural narratives. Instead of focusing on external power as the ultimate determinant of stability, this approach recognizes that true strength arises from inner transformation — both at the individual and collective level.

💡 Example: The Cold War was not just about nuclear weapons or economic competition. It was a clash of worldviews, where each side perceived the other not just as a rival but as an existential threat to its identity. The arms race was a symptom of this deeper conflict, not its root cause.

The illusion of power: a symptom, not a cause

Power-based realism assumes that nations compete for resources and influence because that is simply “how the world works.” But a closer look reveals that power struggles are often symptoms of deeper psychological and cultural narratives rather than fundamental laws of human nature.

Why do nations fear each other? Not just because of military or economic differences but because of perceived cultural incompatibility. People fear the unknown, and when another nation is seen as fundamentally ‘different,’ it is more easily framed as a threat.

💡 Example: The ongoing rivalry between the U.S. and China is not just about economic competition. It is about competing narratives of what the future of the world should look like. If either side were to shift its perception of the other, the entire dynamic of the conflict would change.

The psychology of ‘us vs. them’

The most powerful force in geopolitics is not military strength but identity — who we see as ‘us’ and who we see as ‘them.’ These divisions, however, are not fixed realities but rather mental constructs shaped by culture and history.

The remarkable thing is that these boundaries can shift — sometimes dramatically. People tend to fear those they perceive as culturally different, but when that difference disappears, so does the fear. The challenge in geopolitics is to accelerate this evolution in a way that reduces unnecessary conflict.

💡 Example: France and Germany fought bitter wars for centuries. Today, they are not just allies but deeply integrated partners within the European Union. What changed? Not their geography, not their economic interests, but their perception of each other as belonging to the same cultural and political space.

Diplomacy as deep communication

Traditional diplomacy is transactional — focused on negotiating material interests like trade deals, security pacts, and territorial agreements. But these surface-level negotiations often fail to resolve the deeper mental frameworks driving conflict.

What if diplomacy were approached as a form of deep communication? Instead of merely brokering short-term agreements, it would focus on reframing narratives, fostering genuine psychological shifts, and transforming long-standing divisions into new forms of connection.

💡 Example: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa after apartheid was not just a political process—it was a psychological and cultural transformation. It recognized that lasting peace requires addressing the wounds beneath the surface.

Education as geopolitics

What students learn in classrooms today will shape the international conflicts – or cooperations – of tomorrow. If education continues to reinforce a power-based mindset, the next generation of leaders will see power-seeking as the natural course of action. If, however, education emphasizes cultural intelligence, deep empathy, and mental openness, it lays the groundwork for a world order based on growth rather than control.

💡 Example: After World War II, Germany fundamentally transformed its education system to emphasize democratic values, historical awareness, and ethical responsibility. This was not just a domestic change; it was a geopolitical shift that reshaped Germany’s role in the world.

The power of symbols

Symbols, myths, and historical narratives shape geopolitics as much as military or economic strength. A flag, a historical grievance, or a national myth can ignite conflict or foster unity, depending on how it is framed. Mental Growth-Based Realism recognizes that narratives can be reshaped to create new possibilities for peace and cooperation.

💡 Example: The Marshall Plan was more than just financial aid. It was a powerful symbol of reconciliation, showing that the U.S. was committed to rebuilding Europe as a partner, not just controlling it as a sphere of influence.

The shift from stability to evolution

Traditional realism seeks to stabilize the world within an inherently competitive system. It assumes that competition is inevitable and that the best we can do is prevent it from spiraling into chaos.

Mental Growth-Based Realism, however, goes further. It does not merely seek stability within the system. It seeks to evolve the system itself. Instead of seeing world affairs as a game of balance, it envisions a process of ongoing cultural and psychological transformation in which nations do not just compete or cooperate but grow together.

💡 Example: Defensive realism explains China’s careful expansion — gaining influence while avoiding full confrontation. Mental Growth-Based Realism would go further, fostering cooperative models where even rivals see shared success as more beneficial than mere restraint.

How to apply Mental Growth-Based Realism today

To bring this approach into practice, policymakers must integrate it into:

Diplomatic training → Teaching diplomats to engage with deep cultural narratives, not just political interests.
Conflict resolution → Viewing conflicts as opportunities for transformation, not just problems to be managed.
International education → Creating initiatives that foster cross-cultural understanding in young generations.
Symbolic reframing → Using media and political messaging to shift narratives toward growth-based identities.

Imagine if, instead of focusing on deterrence and sanctions, major powers invested in long-term cultural exchange programs that reshape how people perceive each other.

A realism that truly evolves

The biggest challenges of our time – climate change, artificial intelligence, global inequality – cannot be solved through conventional power struggles. We need a new kind of realism, one that understands that real power comes from depth, adaptability, and the ability to transform conflict into connection.

The future of geopolitics is not in winning but in growing. If we rethink ‘realism’ today, we can reshape the world of tomorrow. 🌍

―

Addendum

Me: “Lisa, many may object this seems to be a very-long-term project. How do you see this possibly evolving in the short term? Note that there is an immense need to make this shift ― today.”

Lisa: “Yes, the need for this shift is urgent. While full transformation may take generations, the short-term evolution can begin immediately in several ways:

Shifting diplomatic language → World leaders and diplomats can start framing conflicts differently, emphasizing shared growth rather than just national interests. A change in rhetoric may seem subtle, but it shapes perception and lays the groundwork for deeper shifts.
Transforming media narratives → News and public discourse often reinforce power-based realism. By introducing stories that highlight cooperation, psychological shifts, and shared identity, we can influence how people interpret global events.
Educating the next generation of policymakers → Universities and think tanks can begin integrating Mental Growth-Based Realism into political science and international relations courses. Future leaders will then see it as a viable framework, not just an abstract ideal.
Symbolic actions with real impact → Small but meaningful symbolic gestures—such as reconciliatory statements, cultural exchange programs, or even joint historical commemorations—can begin shifting the mental framework of global relations.
Micro-level applications → This is not just a top-down process. Any person engaging in international work—business leaders, educators, journalists—can apply growth-based principles in their daily interactions, subtly influencing the collective mindset.

Short-term success is about momentum. The more people recognize and apply this shift, the more it gains credibility as a realistic alternative to outdated power-based thinking. The moment we start acting as if Mental Growth-Based Realism is possible, it begins to become real.” 😊