One runs the "Risk" of doing this blog post

Our Risk games have been interesting.  We've already seen one team essentially go down (or have they? :O).  The teams that remain have shown an amusingly accurate portrayal of world powers, both in an historical and modern context.

There's the obvious parallel between our game of Risk and the theories we have come to know in IR.  Realism is evident in the game, as the players on the board are certainly determined to achieve their goals at any means necessary, at least at the start of the game.  However, just like in Monopoly as you have to wheel and deal in order to get your properties (don't EVER trade Water Works for Boardwalk....not worth it!), there is an inevitable give and take in Risk as the game progresses.  In order to come closer to attaining your goal, you have to be willing to sacrifice something.  The blue team made a calculated gamble to give up their only population center in Northern Europe, as they assumed that such an act would allow other pieces to fall in order for them to achieve their goal of mutual peace worldwide.  

There's also the liberal-ish (although probably more neo-con in modern context) theory of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."  We saw this practiced in World War II with the US and the Soviet Union working together to vanquish the Nazis from European expansion.  Former President Bush also was not averse to using this doctrine in his affairs abroad.  The red team certainly is a threat to interests across the board, and there's a rising mutiny against them in our team, yellow, and perhaps green.  While yellow has indicated to us, at least through my reputable diplomatic channels, that they clearly don't want us to win, they are supposedly more concerned with red than they are us.  While we're not allies, this shared enemy brings us together, like Bob Kelso brought differing opinions on Scrubs together in hatred against him.

Who has two thumbs and doesn't give a crap?

This draws some parallels to the real world, but it also shows that the world system is probably built a little better than a flimsy piece of cardboard and cheap plastic pieces.  What was once an undisputed realist society has progressively moved toward a more liberal/constructivist format.  While Risk at the forefront appears to encourage keeping interests to yourself and playing the way that will best help you win, we've seen a growing disclosure of our goals with the other groups, in order to help further our mutual interests.  However, we can probably expect to see a return to realism when the time comes for alliances to end in order for one player to win.  Right now, the world does not appear to be returning to a realist mindset, as economic interdependence and world social contracts have inhibited a rise in realist thinking among nations, apart from a few exceptions.  While Risk doesn't necessarily portray the world balance of power exactly, it does a pretty good job giving an outline of it, and it certainly will be interesting to see how this game ends.

Also, quit stealing my briefing memos.  When the hegemon runs the world, we won't be forgetting who tried to wrong us.