it’s not that the theories are mortal enemies

No shit? They're theories, not people.

Nobody says one is wrong and the other one is right, that’s not how IR works. The fact that you’re arguing this shows how slow you are and what little info you grasp from the subject.

If neither are right or wrong, then neither serves much purpose, does it? This furthers my idea that IR is ideology, because it proposes two opposites as equivalently right, when in fact they are not even opposites.

You did say I only had two options. Go back and read.

Then why did you ask if I believed you only had two: "Lol btw, do you really think I was only given two options to argue in college?" If I said you only had two, then it wouldn't be a matter of question. Belief is a broad category. There are more than one option per belief. Like for instance, a Catholic and a Baptist both believe that Jesus died, was resurrected, etc. Their belief in Christianity is one of several. They could also have belief in Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, etc. But their options in going about their belief are multiple as well. You can be Republican, Democrat, or otherwise liberal in most liberal classes. There are essentially two beliefs about liberalism in this context.

The more you respond the less I think you graduated college or even went to one. You sound a lot like “fellow kids, I too have attended a university.” It’s okay to be wrong and not know something. What’s not okay is to pull facts out of your ass and mix them with wiki facts and think you’re actually saying something.

I'm becoming more confident that you either didn't pay enough attention in class, or paid too much attention in class, so much so that you missed important details. I never pulled a single fact out of my ass. Please quote me where I did, then demonstrate how it is wrong and pulled out of my ass.

Bro, you ain’t saying shit, but I think you know that. You’re purposely being vague to give the illusion of intelligence. I’m mad I fell for it and tried to have a meaningful discussion with you.

I haven't been vague. Show where I have been vague, then demonstrate what is vague about it. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean that I am being deceptive.

I’m not even gonna touch that last bit about the validity of racism because you’re going on tangents to distract from your ignorance.

You're not going to touch it because it demonstrates that the "open-mindedness" of your professors is bullshit. You could not go into that class and say anything outside the overton window of acceptable discourse. How do I know this? Because i attended (and graduated B.S. cum laude) college and recognized that there were things that were unnacceptable solutions.

Like for instance, one time one woman in a class suggested there is a degree to which a woman walking down the alley at night should take responsibility for making a risky decision like that, if for instance she were raped. Immediately the entire class, especially the feminists in the class interrupted her, shut her down, whatever... That means that the acceptable discourse of this class does not include the discussion of women's responsibility in making smarter decisions in regards to avoiding scenarios they might be raped in.