Peace, the ultimate absence of human conflict. Throughout human history, peace has been the outstanding concept that nations attempt to achieve. However, history has shown countless conflicting periods that indicates the notion that peace is not a human quality. Moreover, many individuals from Grotius to Hobbes have decreed that human nature is violent, nasty and brutish. Therefore, is it possible to achieve world peace? Due to the anarchic system within international society, the possibility of achieving a negative and positive peace is impossible because of state actors aggressive behavioural tendencies that can be conveyed through the liberal concept of peace, liberal democratic theory, realist principles of statism, security dilemma and
…show more content…
In the 1960’s, Galtung theorized that there were two different types of peace. He concluded that a negative peace; the absence of violence and the absence of war and a positive peace; the integration of human society as the essential definitions of peace. These two types of peace are important because they indicate the progressive nature of peace as a political relation to international society. Negative peace by nature are characterized by a absence of violence and war, it tends to be pessimistic and indicates that peace is not always achieved by peaceful means.Meanwhile, positive peace by its nature is characterized by a structural integration of human society, it is optimistic and indicates that peace is achieved by peaceful means. In relation to world peace, the clear suggested type of peace Galtung seeked to achieve is a positive one.. However, how can IS be in a peaceful position. It is important to acknowledge that the term peace is rooted from the Latin word pax meaning to fix. This definition is important because it does not indicate the absence of human conflict in IS. Rather, it suggests that IS can be fixed from a chaotic system to a stable and coherent system where state actors live in relative stable …show more content…
According to the Third Image, liberalism traces the incidence of war to the perception that liberal democratic states are legitimate and just, since they rest on popular consent, while illiberal states are unjust in that they do not receive public consent. Rather than following Kant’s presented notion of represented republics and the example it presents, liberals in contemporary society rush to interventionism as the only means to prevent violent conflict. For instance, the military intervention of Afghanistan and the policy of nation building, US intervention in Somalia during the Clinton presidency and the current situation with ISIL in Syria and Iraq are a few examples of liberal governments rushing to armed conflict
In the 1960’s, Galtung theorized that there were two different types of peace. He concluded that a negative peace; the absence of violence and the absence of war and a positive peace; the integration of human society as the essential definitions of peace. These two types of peace are important because they indicate the progressive nature of peace as a political relation to international society. Negative peace by nature are characterized by a absence of violence and war, it tends to be pessimistic and indicates that peace is not always achieved by peaceful means.Meanwhile, positive peace by its nature is characterized by a structural integration of human society, it is optimistic and indicates that peace is achieved by peaceful means. In relation to world peace, the clear suggested type of peace Galtung seeked to achieve is a positive one.. However, how can IS be in a peaceful position. It is important to acknowledge that the term peace is rooted from the Latin word pax meaning to fix. This definition is important because it does not indicate the absence of human conflict in IS. Rather, it suggests that IS can be fixed from a chaotic system to a stable and coherent system where state actors live in relative stable …show more content…
According to the Third Image, liberalism traces the incidence of war to the perception that liberal democratic states are legitimate and just, since they rest on popular consent, while illiberal states are unjust in that they do not receive public consent. Rather than following Kant’s presented notion of represented republics and the example it presents, liberals in contemporary society rush to interventionism as the only means to prevent violent conflict. For instance, the military intervention of Afghanistan and the policy of nation building, US intervention in Somalia during the Clinton presidency and the current situation with ISIL in Syria and Iraq are a few examples of liberal governments rushing to armed conflict