Differences Of Liberalism, Realism, Liberalism And Feminism

Great Essays
Various theories can be applied to analyze world politics and in each distinct theory, there are certain implications about how the international system is and should be dictated. With this in mind, this essay will describe how realism, liberalism and feminism differ in their political analysis of the world by highlighting the distinguishing factors on each theory. In this sense, the essay will first describe realism with its focus on power politics, then progress to liberalism and its critique on the realist perspective and finally concluding on the nuances in the feminist perspective. Each of these perspectives is important in their own right as they help reconceptualize world politics while providing further comprehension of the current …show more content…
Firstly, liberalism stems from a stream of thought that believes that morality, law and international organization can form the basis of global relations to make peaceful cooperation possible. Liberalism is also optimistic about the international community and its ability to achieve diplomatic solutions while viewing states as part of a collective rather than a unitary actor motivated by self-interest. To this end, liberals challenge the realism assumption that the international system is anarchic by that there are norms, institutions and laws that can establish a form of global authority that state can adhere to. Liberalism argues for the complexities of the international system by asserting that the realist viewpoint is unjustified in its blanket claim about the international system. Secondly, liberals take issue with realism’s unitary actors assumption and argue that along with state actors are a number of nonstate actors, non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations, that contribute to the pursuit of nationalistic goals. Thirdly, liberalism does not consider military force to be the most effective leveraging tool to influence other states, especially when compared to cost-effective, non-military methods such as diplomacy, conflict resolution and peacekeeping efforts. Finally, there is a difference between what liberals and realists consider a …show more content…
This does not necessarily imply peace, but it does incentivize the hegemon to maintain order as they benefit the most from international trade, while also contributing to the prosperity of other nations in their trade. In contrast to unilateral safeguards for world politics, the formation of global alliance to establish stability is known as collective security, which was first proposed by Immanuel Kant. Collective security is the concept of using multilateralism to oppose any actor who threatened the stability of the international system. Also, the inherent collectivism of Kant’s idea secures the interests of the alliance since all would be striving for the same goal, thus deterring self-interested parties while simultaneously protecting weaker nations from global

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Realism Vs Liberalism

    • 804 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Liberalism also reinforces political and economic freedom for a peaceful world order. This is a very different contrast from realism who relies on conflict and security domain that is argued. There are many differences between these two theories of thought. Unlike neorealism which perceives the state as the primary actor, liberalism sees individual acts as crucial to the international arena. Liberalism does agree with realism about the sole importance of a sovereign state.…

    • 804 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Liberalism Vs Realism

    • 1413 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In contrast, Liberals believe that military power is not the most important power; economic and moral power, are. Liberals comprehend that the UN cannot force countries to obey, however they believe that it is still very important. This is because they consider that international organisations give different countries ways to cooperate with one another, in order to gain one’s trust. One can gather that where there is Liberalism, there is a Democracy. (Plattner, 1998).…

    • 1413 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    A neorealist state needs to be sure it has more to gain than its rivals. Neoliberalism is a theory shaped by the ideas of commercial, republican, sociological, and institutional liberalism. They see the international system as anarchic but believe that relations can be managed. Neoliberals think actors with common interests will try to maximize absolute gains. When applying liberal ideas to the international system today, we find two responses to the problems and possibilities posed by globalization.…

    • 702 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Machiavelli’s treatment of human nature seems to advocate the idea that no actions are unjust, as long as they are done in effort to advance the power of the state or principality. Ultimately, Machiavellian international law can’t be just, especially compared to Grotius’ idea of international law, because Machiavelli’s version provides too great a range of what can be a just action, to be practical in regulating relations between sovereign…

    • 1263 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To argue that this provides check and balance on national government is to imply that perfectibility is achievable, which is rarely the case. Perfectionism is one of the core tenets of Liberalism that assumes moral perfection is attainable because humanity is good in nature. In this sense, Pogge’s argument is melioristic. A realist critique of this argument would be that we must not assume every member of a political community will act in a principled manner because there are bound to be some who are “impaired in their capacity for justice”, while others lack it outright. In both scenarios, no institutions or policies can change this fact.…

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Comparison’s which can be made between Realism and Liberalism is, State is the principal actor, the view of Actor is, State is unitary actor. A difference which is also noticeable is the Behavioral dynamic in realism the state is rational actor seeking which maximizes their own interests and what their objective is in foreign policies whereas comparing it to liberalism Behavioral Dynamic is policy making which includes conflict, co-operation and bargaining to compromise which may not lead to the best outcome which is wanted. Mainly for Realist Nation security issues are most important, where as to the liberalist there is not only just the one but many things which are important as national security questions such as welfare issues. There is a number of differences which are shown through-out this theory but some similarities which show through-out. Liberalism and realism both have certain plans and ideas for peace in the international relations theories.…

    • 1094 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Three Ethical Traditions

    • 1971 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Where realism emphasized the state and idealism the individual, communitarianism attempts to find a healthy balance between the two emphases. Communitarianism “emphasizes the role of global civil society in fostering functional transnational ties to address specific issues and challenges confronting the international community” (Amstutz 34). Rather than dismissing the value of either the state or individual, communitarianism recognizes the importance of both to first recognize the humanitarian problems that individuals across the globe face, and the role that capable states play in addressing those individual issues. In unity with realism, communitarianism recognizes the anarchy of the international system, but it differentiates by surmising that the sovereignty of the state is meant to create “a peaceful and just world…best advanced through the right actions of member states” (Amstutz 36). Power is not the motivation for action, rather the quest for a just global order founded upon individuals acting justly within a state.…

    • 1971 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Three Images Of Conflict

    • 2042 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Some believe that “through the reform of states wars can be reduced or forever eliminated.” Though, there are different views in the “how to” approach these reforms. From a liberal’s point of view, the economy is a major focal point in which the decentralization and freedom of the market from the government regulations will lead to a well-balanced and self-regulated market. However, Waltz challenges this assumption by making emphasis on the need for a self-regulated society in order for a self-regulated market to function properly which reminds us of what we learned from the first image that concludes in the acceptance that human nature is imperfect and cannot be changed. Therefore, we cannot expect for a society to successfully regulate itself. After realizing this, liberals have taken a different approach to the issue by moving internally from “laissez-faire liberalism” to “liberal revisionism” concluding that the application of force to internally organize states is the answer to settle disputes.…

    • 2042 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Neorealist believe that the chances of international cooperation occurring are low because of their main concern, which is power distribution. Neorealist believe that the states are too greedy to cooperate with one another. Neorealist are focused on anarchy, making sure no one can enforce rules, and setting unitary rational actors, the distribution of power, and their main goal is security and survival. Neoliberals agree with neorealist but believe that international cooperation is possible due to their optimistic view. Neoliberals know that the institutions have it flaws, and if they all work together there will be less flaws.…

    • 1658 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Realism as a theory doesn’t fit well with Finnemore’s definition and explanation of unipoles. When it comes to a unipole, too much emphasis is placed on social values and norms to match with the basic tenets of realism. Unipoles are effected by everything from social aspects to other smaller states. Realism, on the other hand assumes that, due to the balance of power theory, states will always try to match or overpower others. With the existence of a unipole, the balance of power is off-center because that one state or pole has so much more power and influence than the…

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays