Conversely, the results support the neorealist view that international politics is permanently conflictual because of the structural constraint that arises from the enduring absence of central authority. The results of the investigation cast grave doubts on the twin arguments of critical theorists that discourse shapes practice and that the international system undergoes fundamental change. In essence, like modern states, feudal actors had to arm themselves to remain independent, sought to conquer one another, concluded alliances, formed spheres of influence, and resolved their conflicts by force. While it confirms the communal and cooperative character of feudal discourse, it finds that the actual practices of feudal actors stood in stark contrast to the norms they professed, notwithstanding some adherence on the level of formal appearances. In examining the discourse and practices of medieval actors, this article probes the historical record of the central period of the Middle Ages, the feudal age, which lasted from about A.D. If true, medieval politics would have differed fundamentally from the conflictual politics of modern states. Assuming that medieval discourse consisted of communal norms, critical theorists would expect the behavior of medieval actors to be correspondingly cooperative.

To gain empirical validation as well, critical theorists have suggested that the distinct character of the medieval system supports their argument that international politics is subject to fundamental change. The application of critical theory to international relations has resulted in a most significant theoretical challenge to the neorealist paradigm.

Feudal kingdoms in europe