naughty IR theorists

midst of exams now(: (smiley because midst = oncoming end!)
2 papers done on monday, 1 tmr. all PS left (ULS was first paper)
studying for tmr's paper now: international relations.
something funny-ish i realized about the different theorists and schools of thought that have developed:

.1 There's always the prevailing one that's supported by the superpower and that upon studying we realize (in an oops! sort of way) we subconsciously actually "believe" / adhere to (eg. econ liberalism.. adam smith.. j.m. keynes..);

.2 Then there's the most viable alternative / most taken-seriously argument that hasn't managed to "rule the world" but not for the lack of trying real hard (eg. mercantilism.. 4 asian tiger.. governance as missing jigsaw piece);

.3 and THEN there's all these naughty, rebel theories that go against everything and tend to be very narrow and specific about particular biases held by the theorist or certain issues he/she's interested in (eg. fukuyama, huntington, i duno where to put marx but some parts of it are amusing so i'll place it here i guess).

the naughty ones tickle me sometimes =)

and since prolly noone else found that amusing except for me, here's one to tickle you! (which part of V is not unglam?)