Secondly, the problems of uneven distribution of power and the international system lacking a sovereign authority contributing to make and enforce binding agreements make nations do what they want and like to do causing the difficulties in trusting and cooperate with each other. And, I think that the main goal of a country is power maximization and security, so these power seeking state under the framework of no existing binding power are much more willing to take international relations as a battle for survival. Not surprisingly, all nations will try their best to protect themselves first by seeking power and control. Even though many international level organizations have been created to balance this world, the organization itself doesn’t work well to promote the cooperation. Take United Nation as an example.
This, they believe, offers the only hope for helping former communist-bloc countries: closer integration among the current European Union members helps the prospects for enlargement. Without the unified currency, the reality of the single (unified) market will not be achieved and Europe’s economies will remain divided and weak, unable to compete internationally either with the low-wage economies of Asia or with the large, integrated high-waged economy of the United States. Supporters argue that only a stronger and integrated Europe will be able to exercise leadership on the global issues facing the world e... ... middle of paper ... ... would be more constrained within EMU. Whether this should be seen as a disadvantage or benefit depends on one’s confidence in the national monetary authorities to use a monetary independence wisely. This is an area of policy in which a government has a great capacity to get it wrong.
Ideal must be defined as “satisfying one's conception of what is perfect; most suitable.” This topic is highly controversial, but specific type of governments really lead to a functional government for the citizens and the keys. Many governments have failed after their attempts to develop functional communities. Oligarchy, autocracy, and democracy all have their flaws, but direct democracy is the most government that provided a better living for its citizens. For example, in Switzerland, modern direct democracy exists there; Switzerland’s economic, political, and social conditions outperform most of the countries. However, this type of government should not be applied by all of the countries due to the uneducated majorities in other countries.
Regions are mostly constructs, defined by military, geopolitical and culture; they are not formed by economic development alone. The choice should be first political and second economic. States that make up the regions have to be stable before regionalism can be a stable principal for world order. Regional groups negotiating in the global econ would not make a secure formula as it can be safely said that all the regional groups do not have such strong institutional structures as the EU. The security situation and political bindings the US has made to the EU and East Asia is much weaker since the end of the Cold War Implications of boundary drawing of regions and what about those left outside Constructivism
Many states, even with ideas of democracy or liberalism, do not have the same governments or policies, and might find themselves forced into an agreement that they cannot or will not want to consent to, but need to do anyway because of collective agreement. What happens if a state is a dictatorship? A monarchy? How difficult would it be to unite those states underneath a common government, which would most likely be democratic in nature? Every state in the world doing so is a very slim chance to begin with.
Although there are many famous riots and controversies connected to the World Trade Organization (WTO), most American citizens don’t know what the WTO actually is or what it does. Because there’s so much the average person doesn’t understand, we need to look at the background of the WTO before we can discuss any further details; then we will look at possible explanations of why people protest, and finally we’ll focus on whether or not any protests were justified. The World Trade Organization is designed to create the rules involved with trade. These trading rules include all countries, not just the US, and can therefore be a little tricky at times. "The WTO establishes a framework for trade policies, it does not define or specify outcomes" (Bagwell, K. and Staiger, R. W. 2002).
The capacity of the EU for integration is as limited and as varying as one would suggest it to be. The idea of an integrated EU will not a an easy road because the EU itself has no constant definition of the idea of integration because the members states suggests different levels of with they would like to integrate, which limits, as whole, the integration. 5. The vast variation of the EU has been at an intellectual level of analysis, been the root cause of its challenges because the union has ‘bitten off, more than it can chew’. With a vast amount differentiated nation-states and the unions constant changes in short time periods, they are not able to handle crucial complications among the member states.
Even today there are some very strong examples of how contemporary society has chosen racist or discriminatory paths. I’ve seen a lot of ignorant or bad choices being made by people of higher power, such as Putin actually barring gay people from entering the next Olympics that he will be hosting. Although he has revised that policy, I still am quite surprised by how ignorant of a decision he had made, as he is a man of very high power and responsibility. Regardless of a different culture’s way of seeing things, I think it’s more of a problem caused by a legacy of historical globalization. If Europeans hadn’t acted so discriminately, would our society today be more open minded?
First of all it ensures public accountability. This gives the people a degree of protection against governments becoming too strong. Liberals believe in limited government, and democracy provides this system, as the government is accountable to the people. Although most liberals would agree that government is essential in order to defend the rights of the people, it can also be seen as a threat to individual liberty, so people need some form of protection against it. According to John Stuart Mill, ‘the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others’.
Each branch would be independent and have equal power. Madison also notes that people are fundamentally flawed, so government needs to be able to control their passions. Madison states, “If men were angels, no government would b... ... middle of paper ... ...diverse republic, where it would be difficult for factions to gain majority power. However, Madison knew that to large of a republic would lead to a country with no cohesion among its states. Madison notes that if the republic would get too large, their representatives would take little notice of local issues.