Pros And Cons Of Neo-Liberalism

Great Essays
The largest events and processes in the international life of the twentieth and beginning of the twenty first century, such as the formation of the United Nations; the development of integration processes in Europe, America and Asia; the growth of economic, political and cultural globalization; led to the strengthening of the influence of international relations, the development of world politics and the manifestation of global processes in the life of every society and every person. Moreover, the development of international studies equips the researchers with an understanding of the meaning of all those events that are taking their place in the world, hence, anticipating the further evolution. Meanwhile, international relations remain a sphere …show more content…
It is considered possible to create effective collective security systems within the international system. This is facilitated by economic cooperation and the growing interdependence of states. In such a way, the liberals think that the state must rely on moral principles, avoiding the traditional policy of force and orientation toward different coalitions. Supporters of the liberal paradigm offer to overcome anarchy and violence by concerted political actions.
To continue, it should be stated that neo-liberalism differs significantly from the canonical liberal-idealistic paradigm. Its main characteristic is the recognition of the need for partial state participation in the regulation of socio-economic processes. This is the main difference between neo-liberalism and classical liberalism, which proclaimed the principle of total non-interference of the state in the socio-economic life of society. Neo-liberals, therefore, consider international cooperation not only possible, but also necessary for achieving stability, social progress and world

Related Documents

  • 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
  • Improved Essays

    The oldest liberal ideology, classical liberalism, which first emerged during the enlightenment era, expresses humans as naturally egoistic beings who are more than capable of governing themselves. Classical liberals, such as Thomas Paine, refer to the state as a “necessary evil” that establishes law for the good of society, but also impairs the natural right of freedom of the individual, illustrating a ‘negative’ view of freedom. Classical liberals believe in a laissez-faire and free capitalist economy, a theory that is strongly criticised by modern liberals who argue the economic and social implications of a free trade system. On the other hand, modern liberalism shows a ‘positive’ view towards freedom, maintaining that state intervention should exists solely to enrich the lives vulnerable individuals in order for them to prosper and grow. In addition, the modern sense of liberalism believes that social and economic intervention of the state will rectify mistake brought on by the classical liberal era, e.g.…

    • 1192 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Liberals believe that war and aggression can be lessened and eliminated through collective action. According to Walt, liberalism views the states as central players in international affairs (32). Liberalists believe that the expansion of human freedom is achieved best within democracies and well-cooperated market capitalism. Doyle finds that liberalism leaves a coherent legacy on foreign affairs and argues that the differences among the three theories of liberalism (liberal pacifism, liberal imperialism, and Kant’s internationalism) are not irrational (1152). Doyle examines Schumpeter’s explanation for liberal pacifism, which states that the foundation of pacifism comes from the interaction of capitalism and democracy.…

    • 1730 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • 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

    Modern liberalism and modern conservatism are both incomplete without one another. Both groups carry a unique quality that can bring society together and completes the society. Modern conservatism leans more towards the economy as modern liberalism aids liberty. For instance, without modern liberalism we would not be able to understand that “the government must protect individuals from the inequities of modern society and correct the injustices and failures of “free-market” capitalism including environmental degradation.” Liberals believe that the government plays the role of protecting those rights and disaster from occurring. On the other hand, modern conservatives “emphasize individual property rights and limited government (classical liberalism).”…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    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.…

    • 1692 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Three Images Of Conflict

    • 2042 Words
    • 9 Pages

    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. This can be applied to the domestic affairs, but what about the international affairs? Liberals believe that while force plus reasoning is needed to internally fix the defects of governments, reasoning only will lead international field. As Waltz expresses “In international affairs they would have reason prevail over force, whereas domestically…

    • 2042 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Market democracy acts as an effective hybrid between the two schools of liberal thought. Libertarians, with their emphasis that economic liberty is the paramount liberty, are attracted to market democracy’s contention that economic liberties are at least just as important as any other liberty. High liberals, with their emphasis on social justice, are attracted to market democracy’s acknowledgment that social justice is relevant. With that being said, both ideological groups disagree with parts of a market democracy. High liberals may claim that any system with thick economic liberty has potential problems, such as market failure or exploitation of workers.…

    • 1308 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One of the most prominent distinctions between classical liberalism and New Deal liberalism is the level of government intervention that exists within a particular society. Ultimately both practices attempt to assist and promote the endeavors and economic prosperity of the individual, but one requires more government aid and assistance than the other. Classical liberalism advocates the idea that the government should remain hands-off during economic exchange, as it coercively hinders an individual's’ freedom of obtaining life, liberty, and property. In addition, the idea of free market is highly favored and accepted within classical liberalism. In contrast, New Deal liberalism believes that increased government spending and regulation is necessary…

    • 963 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    His ability to be fluid in his decision-making mentality grants him the freedom to do what he sees best fitting encourages an epistemology that is arguably better than the one of realist and liberalist thought. While the latter two are set on their epistemologies, constructivism is fluid with the relationship societies have with international relations. Constructivist thought is therefore worthier of being the school of thought that shapes international politics because it takes into consideration the social components of domestic relations and the individual is able to accommodate their beliefs to still fit under the constructivist model; qualities that realism and liberalism both…

    • 1696 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays