crisis of morality in the framework of international relations which in turn led to a clash of national interests, this also caused that the interests of some countries were ignored. Politics consists of two main elements that cannot be separated from each other, utopia and reality. The conclusions to the book are that the small independent nation-state is obsolete or obsolescent and that no workable international organisation can be built on a membership of a multiplicity of nation-states. In addition, protection of the status quo is not a policy that can be sustainable in the long-term, therefore, the old order cannot be restored, and a drastic change of outlook is unavoidable, therefore, the best hope of progress towards international conciliation seems to lie along the path of economic reconstruction as a repetition of the crisis of 1930-33 would not be tolerated in a near future. Responses Since its publication, The Twenty Years' Crisis has been an essential book in the study of international relations. It is still commonly read in undergraduate courses, and the book is considered "one of the founding texts of classical realism". The book has served as the inspiration for numerous other works, such as The Eighty Years' Crisis, a book written by the International Studies Association as a survey of trends in the discipline, edited by Michael Cox, Tim Dunne, and Ken Booth, who write that "many of the arguments and dilemmas in Carr's The Twenty Years' Crisis are relevant to the theory and practice of international politics today", praising the book as "one of the few books in the 80 years of the discipline which leave us nowhere to hide". The response to Carr has not been entirely positive. Caitlin Blaxton criticized Carr's moral stance in the work as "disturbing". Scholars have also criticized Carr for his presentation of the so-called realist-idealist conflict. According to Peter Wilson, "Carr's concept of utopia ... is not so much a carefully designed scientific concept, as a highly convenient rhetorical device". Conversely, rather than attempt to critique Carr with the benefit of hindsight, Stephen McGlinchey states that Carr's analysis of events in The Twenty Years Crisis was significant and timely within its context, particularly in its critique of the League of Nations. John Mearsheimer describes it as among the three most influential realist works of international relations of the 20th century. Mearsheimer argues that the book gives a great