alist interpretation has only taking into account the maintenance of power for states as the driving force behind international insecurity while refusing or denying the cultural variable as a factor in the power structure. Where realists have only addressed the results of which threats an anarchical world forces upon states, social constructivists explain how the threat was formed from a broader social context.
             Social constructivism adds a social background as the explanation for the actions of a state and assumes that actions undertaken by national leadership are all based upon historical, social and political struggle that creates an identity of a state. Established relationships between states can only be identified and understood by taking into account the fact that states do not exist in a vacuum and there are global interactions that can only be explained and interpreted using the broader understanding of individual domestic socio-political arenas that challenge the dominance and positions of power within a state. There are background details and social reasoning to be considered when describing modern cultures of fear, power, authority, and thus insecurity. A realist scholar has none of these deeper-rooted meanings to rely upon to try and describe their fundamental belief that t
             ...