Mearsheimer is very much an imperialist and a believer in the US hegemony. However, his analysis is generally lucid. We don't have to agree with his ideals and biases, but I think that his understanding of the geopolitical situation is very much worth considering.
I agree. It's always important to consume media critically.
Understanding bias, and understanding that just because someone makes good points on one topic doesn't mean they can't have garbage takes on many others, is important. But we shouldn't completely close ourselves off to every media source except those that we already agree with 100%.
I am happy to see that Mearsheimer is getting called out on his imperialism apologia and pro-US hegemony bullshit even in the comments of this video, whose audience is most certainly not a majority Marxist one. Even non-Marxists can see that his kind of "realists" are only "realistic" about the Russia conflict because they want to pivot to China instead.
Exactly, it's vital to comprehend the thought processes and origins of people's viewpoints. As long as their arguments are genuine and well-informed, it is valuable to consider such perspectives. This process not only enhances your own understanding by requiring you to formulate solid counter-arguments against opposing views, but also prevents the creation of echo chambers where people simply reinforce each other's preconceived notions.
When we disagree with people like Mearsheimer we should be able to clearly articulate our own position, and the root of our disagreement.
It doesn't hurt to clarify. Not everyone is at the same stage of development and might be misslead because Mearsheimer "realist" views are more eloquent than your average lib.
Of course. It's good to clarify the ideological orientation of a piece of geopolitical analysis so that we know how to contextualize it and understand where its strengths and weaknesses lie based on the biases of the source. The article you linked is very good and all the points it makes are absolutely correct.
I think most of us here would agree that outside of his analysis of the Ukraine conflict (which for someone with his popularity and reach in western geopolitical circles is decent, though woefully incomplete - he never talks about the Nazi problem in Ukraine and the shelling of the Donbass for instance!) Mearsheimer is not that impressive of an analyst.
