International relations can be viewed under realism or liberalism. Since Brexit relates to international relations among European countries, it can be analyzed using either realism or liberalism. To clarify, Brexit is a short name for “British exit,” which was a reference to the public vote of Britain’s citizens to exit the European Union. In short, European Union is an international organization forming an environment for the European member states solve internal or external political or environmental issues, increase job availability, and create other economic opportunities. Regarding Brexit, realism and liberalism have different viewpoints. Particularly, since realism claims that a state’s ultimate goal is power, realism suggests that …show more content…
On the one hand, without international relations from the EU, Britain is economically and socially vulnerable. While Britain’s exit from the EU may define Britain’s power according to British citizens, the type of power that matters is relative power, which is the power when it is being compared to other states. If the other states do not recognize Britain as a force of power, then its exit from the EU is pointless. On the other hand, by discontinuing the benefits granted by the EU, Britain declines the assistance that could have helped the country to become more powerful. In other words, Brexit decreases a source of gathering power for Britain, since the EU not only offers economic opportunities, but it also provides useful information so that the member states can behave accordingly. Overall, realism suggests that while Brexit increases Britain’s confidence in being powerful, it also decreases the country’s power in a way. Under liberalism, there are not many benefits of Brexit that can be analyzed, especially since liberalism believes in the efficiency of the international organizations or the EU. Nevertheless, liberalism could argue for Brexit that the decision of leaving the EU allows Britain to regain its sovereignty, because joining an international system reduces a state’s sovereignty due to regimes, or international laws that the system proposes. By relying less on the union, Britain can be self-initiative to
”Examine the extent to which the benefits of UK membership in the European Union outweigh the costs”
To better understand Brexit, one must know about the European Union (EU). The EU began following World War II with a purpose to create economic agreements amongst the countries of Europe. The belief behind the establishment of the EU is that countries whom trade with one another are less likely to go to war. Since its establishment, the EU has grown in number of member states and in the amount of power the governing bodies of the EU possess. In 1992, the EU became a single market as if it is one country. All new members of the EU must adopt the EU’s currency, the euro, in which 19 of the 28 countries have adopted. As a single market the EU parliament sets laws in many areas: environment, transport, consumer rights, etc. The single market allows
In recent years, Europe has faced many dramatic changes which require important decisions to be made from each and every country. Historically, many European countries have shown to be very protective of their respective national identities. Several of these recent important changes and events taking place in Europe threaten the idea of these countries national identities. It is the decisions these countries make which will shape the future of the European Union. As tensions grow, certain countries are beginning to figuratively as well as literally break away from the standards of the European Union. Depending on how countries decide to react, these changes may very well lead to the decline of “Liberal Democracy.”
The European world changed forever on June 23rd. The United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, and it passed. The 52 to 48 percent vote started a never before seen process that is surely going to have international implications and reactions. Throughout our course we have studied a couple of ideologies surrounding international politics. Through the lens of the realist and liberalist approach we have looked at previous issues to learn their respective teachings. Now I am asked to applying these teachings to a real world event happening as we speak. This essay will start by outlining the differences between the two schools of though on the “Brexit” (BBC). It will then evaluate the strengths and limitations in dealing the Brexit. Lastly I will offer an explanation from both standpoints as to why this majority decision was made. It was valuable to keep in that this event was not sporadic but rather the long term manifestation of discontent with the EU’s system by Great Britain.
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.
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 ...
In regards to the future of parliamentary sovereignty, the referendum in 2017 may alter the whole situation completely. The outcome of opting out of the EU would result in blocking EU legislation and parliament would achieve greater power. EU supremacy could also decrease significantly within a period of time as the UK supports a “red card” system which allows rights to member states to disregard unwanted directives. If the UK remains in the European Union, EU supremacy will always manage to override parliamentary sovereignty. The solution for this would suggest that the UK should not remain as a member of the EU in order gain full control.
Lelieveldt, H. and Princen, S. 2011The politics of the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Realism explain military and security issue enough but underestimate the influence of global connection to peace and stable; It also ignore the influence of non-state actors. Liberalism, on the other hands, focus on the global corporation on economic and culture, but it is still not sufficient to explain the problems of terrorism, ethical conflict, sexism, and international conflict. Indeed, each international theory only focus on one perspective so there are won 't be one international theory that can use to explain all international phenomenons. In other words, there will not be a single theory able to provide the best compass for formulating foreign policy in every
Therefore its imperative to conclude that the one causality that contributed the most to the British Empire’s decline is the policy of isolation. One reason is because Great Britain established itself as a stand alone empire, without the need of entangling alliances. In other words, Great Britain achieved dominance through its isolation policy, and lost dominance through its isolation policies.
...t view is a very narrow view of globalisation, simply dismissing its existence without looking deeper into globalisation. It is therefore fair to say that the liberal approach to globalisation is most useful as it gives an in depth view of globalisation with links to contemporary examples. The liberal view is more practical than the neo-realist view as can be shown by Reagan and Thatcher adopting the policies of Adam Smith in the 1980’s. therefore, although the neo-realist approach to globalisation is both interesting and insightful, the liberal approach to globalisation is much more useful as it is up to date and practical, and seems to be a more accurate way to describe global politics at the present time, particularly with Europe suffering from recession due to US markets. Therefore the liberal approach to globalisation is more useful than that of neo-realists.
...he squatter camps of the city which they are living. Moreover slums are also the source of all kinds of social evils such as drugs and prostitution because of the lowest security.
Kaufman, D., Parker, J., Howell P., Doty, G., (2004). Six Principles of Political Realism. In Understanding International Relations: The Value of Alternative Lenses. Waltz, K.N.; New York: McGraw-Hill.
It is clear that talks about Brexit will not end quickly, and most important question is, what will happen in future. Well it could be claimed that is three different endings how this situation could end. Firstly one of the scenario is that Brexit happened and the U.K. completely leaves EU. In that case firstly British currency, the pound sterling, will fall down even more, than in the start after referendum. Also it will have consequences not only in Britain but also in the hole world, for example , some other countries, will see how Britain left European Union, and they will also will spoke to leave EU. So British leaving EU will have wide ranging repercussions on the other countries who look into EU skeptically also it will help Euro-skeptic
In conclusion, The United Kingdom has many interesting factors that set it off from the rest of the world. History has shown to work out well for this striving country. Under the reign of Monarch Queen Elizabeth II, the United Kingdom follows under a Constitutional monarchy. The Island setting of this land attracts many people for multiple reasons, thus bringing more variety. With religions ranging from Christianity to Hinduism, and immigration constantly from all over the world, the cultural variations have made it difficult to put one single definition on what it means to be a part of the UK. Lastly, the large military has made an even bigger impact on its allies. In a changing world, the United Kingdom has no problems making a positive influence on all the countries around it.