For neorealism, why states continuously seek power has little to do with human nature. Neorealism explains why states want more power with reference to the structure of the international system. While classical realism mainly focuses on state leaders and their decisions, neorealism, by contrast, emphasizes the structure of the international system that is external to the actors, in particular the relative distribution of power. Therefore, the correct option is E.

In a Kantian system, states no longer see each other as enemies or rivals, but friends and “the scope of shared norms is much more extensive” (Steans et.al., 2010: 195). Drawing from Immanuel Kant’s ideas, Wendt argues that this culture is the closest one to a collective security system where states identify with each other and define their interests collectively. In other words, in a Kantian culture states form a community. 

John A. Hobson was a liberal thinker and an economist who was one of the first writers to use the concept of imperialism and even inspired Lenin’s development of the theory of imperialism. According to him, imperialism stems from the wrong practices within capitalism, capitalists preferred to convert the surplus of capital into reinvestment in order to make a profit outside their own country, since there was excessive production but inadequate consumption in society. In other words, the investigation of new investment and market opportunities for unused capital and non-consumable goods within the country leads to imperialism

The double reading method was included to literature as a deconstruction style by Derrida. The aim here is to understand the story of the construction of the identity of a discourse, a text or any other social institution. 

The first reading tells in accordance with original by using its own assumptions of the dominant discourse. In other words, it tries to show how dominated reinterpretation provides self-integrity or continuity of the discourse or institution. The main point here is the second reading. It tries to expose the inner contradictions and how they are unsuccessfully closed and displaced by exerting pressure on the discourse or weaknesses of the institution. 

Colonialism, as Europeans originally used the term signified not ruling over indigenous people or the extraction of their wealth, but primarily the transfer of communities who sought to maintain their own original culture, while seeking a better life in economic, religious or political terms. Therefore, the correct option is D.

The answer is A.

The adherents of the Copenhagen School assert that security cannot be confined only to national security and thus broaden the conception of security to include military, political, economic, societal and environmental issues. The correct answer is A. 

The securitization theory, on the other hand, argues that threats are discursively constructed and “securitization like politicization, has to be understood as essentially an intersubjective process” 
According to the securitization theory, when the process of securitization is successfully accomplished, this allows the political elite to take “emergency measures and (justifies) actions outside the normal bounds of political procedure”.
“The use of this speech act had the effect of raising a specific challenge to a principled level, thereby implying that all necessary means would be used to block that challenge” (Wæver, 2011:95). Securitization legitimizes the use of force and allows the state to mobilize or to take special powers to handle existential threats.

In the modern world, then, we can distinguish colonization as the takeover of territory, appropriation of material resources, exploitation of labor and interference with political and cultural structures of another territory or nation, from imperialism as a global system. The correct answer is C

the appropriation of land and space meant that colonialism was, as Said has emphasized, fundamentally an act of geographical violence, a geographical violence employed against indigenous peoples and their land rights. (Said, 1993: 1-15). The correct answer is B.

The CS contributed to security studies in three major theoretical and conceptual ways: the theory of securitization, the notion of different sectors of security and regional security complex theory.

Archaeology was a crucial method for Foucault but this metodology could not convincingly explain the causes of discontinuities which meant that objects or phenomena were not perceived, classified, or depicted in the same way in the transition from a historical period to another. He also noted that archaealogy’s limitations in his foreword to the English translation of The Order of Things. That’s why the philosopher worked on a new methodology called “genealogy” in Discipline and Punish for remedying this deficiency. The point that should be considered here is not the fact that genealogy is a deviation from archeology but rather is the purpose of completing it. Genealogy deals with the imposition of present on the past. This metodology focuses on the complex relationship between discourse and power, and tries to show that history is shaped within the framework of these relations and does not have continuity.

It should be underlined that the genealogy does not only consist of collecting certain data from the history. Here, the primary aim is to reveal the formations of them and the power-knowledge relations in their backgrounds by -in the words of Derrida- deconstructing the established understanding and norms. Thus, Foucault tries to demonstrate that words, language, or discourse (utterances/statements and texts) are not as innocent as those attempted to show, and are shaped within the framework of current power/ knowledge and power relations. In a sense, by deconstructing social relations, it aims to show that there are multiple perspectives by freeing them from the general narratives/commandments that have a heap of historical domination. The way to do this is to create a counter memory. As can be understood from the information given, the correct answer is E.

The adherents of the CS assert that security cannot be confined only to military issues and thus broaden the conception of security to include military, political, economic, societal and environmental issues.

The Copenhagen School (CS), which emerged in the 1990s, has been and is being used to refer to the works of Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver, Jaap de Wilde and others studying international security.

Intersubjectivity is most simply stated as the interchange of thoughts and feelings, both conscious and unconscious, between two persons or “subjects,” as facilitated by empathy.

However, it should not be understood that poststructuralists are anti-state. This approach neither ignores the state nor aims to move beyond the state (Campbell,2013: 226). Poststructuralists, do not seek to explicate international politics by focusing on the state which is accepted as a given subject. According to them, the problematic is the state-centric perspective and the limitations and costs that this perspective causes by ignoring many aspects of world politics. That is why, poststructuralist thought focuses on discursive practices that produce the state-centric perspective. 

Alexander Wendt is one of the most important and influential scholars in the constructivist school. He agrees with other constructivists that the structure of international system is social and that identity is the basis of interests. However, he adopted a systemic approach to show that states’ identities and interests are formed at the system level; in addition, they are endogenous to state interaction. 

Naturalistic constructivism, which is mainly associated with the writings of Alexander Wendt, defines IR as part of the social sciences, and puts more emphasis on the intersubjective aspects or structures of social life. Therefore, the correct option is A.

Foucault in his work called “The Order of Things” said that to understand the social structures and the individuals acting according to the social parameters formed within this structure; the researchers should focus on changing historical conditions, not on time-independent and unchanging a priori ideas. In simple terms, he said that they should evaluate each event/case according to its context and the conditions of its time. As a reason, he put forward the claim that science is dominated by discontinuity and epistemological breaks, rather than universality or continuity. 

For most scholars of security studies, security is not an easy term to define. At its base, the term ‘security’ involves the “alleviation of threats to cherished values” (Williams, 2008: 1). Both Realist and Liberal theories generally “explain security by identifying an objective situation as threatening to an objective entity” (Balzacq, 2011a: xiii). In other words, according to traditionalists, security means a freedom from any objective military threat to the state survival in an anarchic international system. The traditional definition of security, however, is most commonly associated with political Realism that defines security as national security. In both classical and structural variants, Realism defines security in terms of national security in which the survival of the state is the main objective. Thus, “Realism is usually seen to emphasize the state as the main object of security, and war as the main threat to it”