Liberalism And Marxism Compare

751 Words4 Pages
In ‘The Empires with Expiration Dates’ (2006), Niall Ferguson justifies his argument that the United States is a relatively young empire (Niall, pg. 50). As a liberalist, he believes in the decline in power of the U.S. through an economic point of view (ibid, pg.51). Liberal idea derives from the breakdown of feudalism in Europe, replaced with the market capitalist society (Andrew, pg. 29). Liberal thought, often associated with Western civilisation in general, is identified by a commitment to individualism; it values strongly on human individual and focuses on freedom (ibid). Niall begins with an overview of the empires and explains the foreseeable fall of the U.S. Empire (Niall, pg. 49). He argues that the economies of scale that the empire create is the key to success since it needs resources to mobilise and equip military forces; the amount of military personnel is no longer the main factor due to demographic limit to the number of people that the states can put under arms (Niall, pg. 51). However, the widening U.S. deficit of troops, budget, and economic pose a potential threat for the ephemeral empire (ibid.). Moreover, Niall suggests that an empire does not have to only provide security for itself by exploiting the resources of the foreign land, but imperial rule can also provide general benefits such as increase trade, better education, and improve justice or governance, for the third parties being ruled (Niall, pg. 52). In ‘The Empire Expands Wider and Still Wider’ (2003), Eric Hobsbawm perceives the downfall of the U.S. Empire through a Marxist point of view. Marxism, influenced by the writings of Karl Marx, has constituted for most of the modern period the principle alternative to liberalism as the basis for political thought (Andrew, pg. 82). Marxists argue that the state cannot be separable from the economic structure of society; its function being to
Open Document