Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Free trade and protectionism
Is free trade always a good thing essay - 300 words
Free trade and protectionism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Free trade and protectionism
Topics related to the growth of NGOs, MNCs, free trade, and the spread of democracy within contemporary international politics are explainable by Liberalism’s core ideologies. Since Liberalism views anarchy as an effect of the players within the system and not a structure of the system, Liberalists believe that it can be eliminate through cooperation between players. Furthermore, Liberalists provide three ways to accomplish systematic harmony to include free trade within the economic system, player cooperation, to achieve various goals to include social topics by not limiting those who can affect and influence the system, and the development of organizations to supervise the actions of the international system and the interactions between states (Baylis et all 2011, 102-106, 252-253).
Understanding the difference in how the system is viewed between Liberalism and Structural Realism allows each theory to discuss different subjects within international topics, however from the end of the Cold War to the attacks on 9/11, Liberalists felt that their theory was dominant over Structural Realism. The time showed the growth of various players, the spread and advocacy of democracy, which eliminates potential threats to and from other democratic actors all working within a free market economic system (Walt 1998). Liberalism still feels that it is relevant in international politics today although it does face some challenges. It does not take into account the continued conflict between the stronger players as they continue to reach for more economic and technological power to gain influence over one another, or why transitional democratic players enter into internal conflict, limiting their role in the international system. While Str...
... middle of paper ...
... explain why the action is occurring.
Constructivism makes some strong claims for explaining the international system and the agents it envelops. It is a social theory that relies heavily on reflexivity as the structure for change to occur between the agent-structure system (Drulak 2001, 366-373). While Constructivism may provide insight on the causal reason for why change or action occurred within the system, it does not provide the ability to explain and predict the enduring consistencies within international politics (Baylis et all 2011, 164). As with Structural Realism, Constructivism also struggles with a system with differentiated units, as it describes the influence of change between individuals, agents, and the system continuously influencing one another but the agents within the system remain undifferentiated amongst on another (Drulak 2001, 375-376).
The Great Depression Era Presidents: Liberal or Conservative? Throughout the 1920s, the United States thrived economically, but by the end of the decade the United States were thrown into a major depression, the worst the country had ever seen, and no one knew exactly what to do about it. During the Depression, the US had two presidents, Herbert Hoover and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, both had different ways of approaching the severe deficit, and both were labeled as conservative or liberal. Conservative means a general belief in a less powerful federal government, a laissez-faire (hands-off) method of doing business, and a drip-down method of helping the economy. The word conservative often comes into play when describing the opposite of someone liberal, or believing in a strong federal government, government regulation of business, and a perculatory method of helping the economy.
By definition neo-liberalism is “a reinterpretation of liberalism that posits that even in an anarchic international system, states will cooperate because of their continuous interactions with each other and because it is in their self-interest to do so; institutions provide the framework for cooperative interactions.” (Mingst, 2011) The theory (neo-liberalism) relies on the prisoner’s dilemma, the initiation and use of institutions, and the common interest of one’s self to gain power and/ or advance without hurting themselves.
Both 1984 and The Handmaid’s Tale are dystopian novels, however, these books are a lot more complex than mere portrayals of dystopia, it can be argued that they are explorations of dystopia rather than mere portrayals. In order to explore dystopia, many themes must be considered, such as; feminism, love and repression. Nonetheless, it is apparent that human characteristics are the driving point of the two novels, predominantly, the depiction of human resilience. In an imperfect world, it is important to have certain qualities which, if plentiful, it can mean success, whereas if it lacks, it can mean failure, this characteristic is resilience. The protagonists in each novel, Winston in 1984 and Offred in The Handmaid’s Tale face situations which leave them both in disarray, and both even consider suicide. The authors tentatively highlight human resilience, its limits and most importantly its strengths into the two novels.
Realism can be described as a theoretical approach used to analyze all international relations as the relation of states engaged in power (Baylis, Owens, Smith, 100). Although realism cannot accommodate non-state actors within its analysis. There are three types of realism which include classical (human
In this essay, I posit that despite the harsh clashes between liberalism and republicanism, both elements play important roles in American politics, and their marriage has given birth to a unique America. I will begin by giving brief explanations about liberalism and republicanism, before showing how their dynamic interaction has given rise to American exceptionalism. It is also important to note that the slight emphasis on liberalism more than republicanism that is also evident in the US Constitution.
Mearsheimer J. J. (2010). Structural Realism. International Relations Thoeries, Discipline and Diversity (Second Edition), p.77-94
In order for countries to cohesively overcome international barriers, frameworks of ideal political standards must be established. Two of these frameworks constantly discussed in international relations are the theories of Neo-realism and Liberalism; two theories with their own outlook at the way politicians should govern their country as well as how they should deal with others. Neo-realism lies on the structural level, emphasizing on anarchy and the balance of power as a dominant factor in order to maintain hierarchy in international affairs. In contrast, Liberalism's beliefs are more permissive, focusing on the establishments of international organizations, democracy, and trade as links to strengthen the chain of peace amongst countries. Liberalism provides a theory that predominantly explains how states can collaborate in order to promote global peace; however, as wars have been analyzed, for example World War II, the causes of them are better explained by Neo-realist beliefs on the balance of power and states acting as unitary actors. Thus, looking out for their own self interest and security.
Liberalism assumes that the war and can be policed by the institutional reforms that empower the international organizations and law.
In conclusion realist and liberalist theories provide contrasting views on goals and instruments of international affairs. Each theory offers reasons why state and people behave the way they do when confronted with questions such as power, anarchy, state interests and the cause of war. Realists have a pessimistic view about human nature and they see international relations as driven by a states self preservation and suggest that the primary objective of every state is to promote its national interest and that power is gained through war or the threat of military action. Liberalism on the other hand has an optimistic view about human nature and focuses on democracy and individual rights and that economic independence is achieved through cooperation among states and power is gained through lasting alliances and state interdependence.
The liberalism and the realism approaches the international relations from very different perspective, and even though many of its views contrast from each other, the ...
I am a liberal. Modern liberalism in the United States is associated with the ideas of liberty and political equality; its advocates favor change in the social, political, and economic realms to better protect the well-being of individuals and to produce equality within society. My liberal views align with the Democratic Party on almost every single issue.
However, the structure and process of international relations, since the end of World War II, has been fundamentally impacted through an immense growth of a variety of factors at multiple levels, which leads to the liberalist theoretical perspective of global complex interdependency. The complex interdependency is constructed from the liberalist theoretical perspective emphasizing interdependence between states and substate actors as the key characteristics of the international system (Ray and Kaarbo 7), which means that cooperation can be made more te...
Liberalism and democracy are closely tied together in international politics. They have a central bond which brings out the notion of democratic peace. Today much of Latin America and the European Union practices democracy. The chances of these nations getting into an armed conflict are very scarce in today’s standards. Liberalism promotes the idea of human security and equality and democracy reinforces that idea into the political framework of governing bodies and their higher authorities. Liberalism leads to democracy which promotes democratic peace preventing conflict between nations. This article will look at how liberalism leads to democratic peace through the process of creating democracy.
Doyle, Michael W. and G. John Ikenberry, eds. (1997) New Thinking in International Relations Theory. Boulder, CO: Westview Pres.
Modern day society is engrossed in a battle for protection of individual rights and freedoms from infringement by any person, be it the government or fellow citizens. Liberalism offers a solution to this by advocating for the protection of personal freedom. As a concept and ideology in political science, liberalism is a doctrine that defines the motivation and efforts made towards the protection of the aforementioned individual freedom. In the current society, the greatest feature of liberalism is the protection of individual liberty from intrusion or violation by a government. The activities of the government have, therefore, become the core point of focus. In liberalism, advocacy for personal freedom may translate to three ideal situations, based on the role that a government plays in a person’s life. These are no role, a limited role or a relatively large role. The three make up liberalism’s rule of thumb. (Van de Haar 1). Political theorists have