This article traces how the major paradigms in international relations have viewed power over the past 40 years. It argues that theorizing in the 1970s began a bifurcation that served to split the vison of power between two extremes: a hard-power pole on one side (Realism) and a soft-power pole on the other (Neoliberalism and Constructivism). It further argues that scholars who have studied international power have merely been engaged in hovering around the mean, and have always embraced the belief that power was not a binary concept. Rather than looking to the theoretical poles for the true face of international power, scholars are best off embracing a smarter middle or Cosmopolitan view of power.