Liberal institutionalism or institutional liberalism is a modern theory of international relations which claims that international organizations and institutions such as NATO, EU and the United Nations can increase and aid cooperation between states. Institutional liberalism builds on this beginning by arguing that it is possible for positive-sum games to exist in the world of international politics: that is, if states work together, they can both benefit from the process and, therefore, it makes sense for cooperation to spread in as many areas as possible. On the other hand new institutionalism is a theory that focuses on developing sociological views of institutions- the way they interact and the way they affect the society. It provides a way of viewing institutions outside of the traditional views of economics by explaining why and how institutions emerge in a certain way within a given context. New institutionalism recognizes that institutions operate in an environment consisting of other institutions, called the institutional environment.
Doyle argues that liberal states although in theory are peaceful, they are also “prone to war. Liberal states have created a separate peace.. and have also discovered liberal reasons for aggression” (1151 Doyle). The discipline of international relations by nature encompasses a broad range of political ideas, arguably non more important than liberalism. Doyle defines liberalism as a “portrait of principles and institutions recognisable by... commitment to individual freedom, government through democratic representation, rights of private property and equality of opportunity”. (P.1152).
Tocqueville and the Relevance of His Theories on Equality Today Alexis de Tocqueville believed that equality was inevitable and that society loves equality more than it does liberty. He stated that the “chief passion which stirs men at such times is the love of this equality,” referring to equality of conditions (Tocqueville, 504). According to him, democracy cannot exist without equality and equality further leads to individualism (Tocqueville, 506). This paper will discuss why Tocqueville’s analyses on equality are still relevant in today’s Western society by focusing on equality of conditions, democracy, and individualism. In Democracy in America (1840), Tocqueville stated that “every citizen must be put in possession of his rights, or rights must be granted to no one” (Tocqueville, Marxists Internet Archive).
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.
These forces today, shaped and controlled by giant corporations, are directed toward profits, not people. Bishop’s challenge is that the church and the peoples of the world’s great religions must join hands in cooperative efforts to transform globalization as project into something more humane, just, and compassionate. In this huge task we will be empowered by the God of unconditional, allembracing love. Fifty years ago, referring to the impact of radio and the wireless, an editorial challenged, “Distances
According to liberalists, it is up to the states and other actors in the International System to either take advantage of those or not. For liberals, states are obviously important (some more important than others), but also businesses, churches, religious movements, social movements, and other sort of organizations. Liberals believe in interdependence, in factors that lead to peace; while realists tend to be skeptical about interdependence because they want to be mutually dependant in a world that is very dangerous. The realist say that today's fine could be tomorrow's enemy. As for realists, there's never enough power because you would never know who is going to be aligned against you down the road, or who is making plans against you.
Ideals such as a focus on the individual, individual rights and equality, a social contract based on government by consent, free market, and minimum government intervention and maximum freedom. I will concentrate on the works of other prominent ‘liberals’ of the same period of classical liberalism, such as Locke and Mill as a comparison to Hobbes in an attempt to establish if Hobbes can be regarded as a liberal. Perhaps the most important and fundamental principle of liberalism is that it centres around the individual and their rights. Mill in ‘On Liberty’ states that the cultivation of individuality produces humans who are ‘noble and beautiful objects of contemplation’ (Hampsher-monk, 2000). He holds the value of individuals as the highest in human life and in the role of promoting a development of civilisation.
Fair traders and free traders have a surprising amount of common ground. Both camps are concerned with global justice, poverty alleviation and global prosperity Free trade refers to a general openness to exchange goods and information between and among nations with few-to-no barriers-to-trade. Fair trade refers to exchanges, the terms of which meet the demands of justice. Proponents of fair trade argue that exchanges between developed nations and lesser developed countries (LDCs) occur along uneven terms, and should be made more equitable. The Fair Trade Federation's Annual Report describes the fair trade movement as "a global network of producers, traders, marketers, advocates and consumers focused on building equitable trading relationships between consumers and the world's most economically disadvantaged artisans and farmers."
They encourage the idealistic thoughts and solutions toward international issues to solve present and future social, economic, and political issues. Though the concept sounds great, it’s not all plausible for the fact that the U.N. enforces financial pressure upon nations such as the United States, Japan, and Germany, because the organization’s regular and peacekeeping budget continues to increase at a rapid rate. To the U.N., the contributions by the U.S. for these two budgets are considered mandatory and not voluntary, which can lead to individuals of that particular state purposing constructive and realistic ideas that would push for secession from the U.N. for such use and abuse of the U.S. funding, particularly in the United States’ current economic recession. Idealism is not completely dead in the international level of politics today. When the occasion calls for it, it can still become effective, as it did with Nelson Mendela’s persistent quest for equality of blacks and whites in South Africa, which is a reminder of the noble potential of idealism in the international
I will look at the theories international relation by comparing realism and liberalism theories. The realist state see power in international relations as the ultimate element to be use international organization or among state. While the liberal state see such not to be necessary in a way that the world peace can be achieve in various ways like free trade without using power. According to Barbieri ‘although the cold war was different than major powers, liberal scholars argued that free trade and the expansion of ties between states was the best way to unite former adversaries’ (Barbieri, 2005, p. 1). When power is apply to international organization or state it may cause conflict not only to the states in conflict but put the world in fear and their allies, this can be trace during the cold war among the United Nation Security Council and the rest member state where in fear.