Name
Lecturer
Course
Date
Introduction
International relations and politics involved between states have been a controversial matter with the question of how far one state’s involvement in another’s affairs is justifiable. The issue has always been the drive powerful states have to ensure their interests are met as was the case in “the cold war” with the two superpowers at the time pushing for their interest in specific countries (Mingst & Snyder, p.25). The negative impact this had on the affected nations informs the call for liberalism. With various amendments to laws and the establishment of international bodies aimed at championing the interest of all countries, more autonomy is assumed to be given to each state. However, with superpowers still evidently having a say in the affairs of developing countries, the question arises on just how far the world order today is liberal. This question is analyzed in this paper with a presentation of arguments on the answer provided.
Liberalism overview
The concept of liberaXXXX XX drawn from the XXXXXX of XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX more than one party XXX XXX degree XX independence given XX XXXX to XXXX their XXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXXX independently. XX XXXXXXXXXXXXX relations, XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX how countries XXXXXX with each XXXXX XXX XXX autonomy XXXXX XX XXXX other. Different scholars XXXXXXXX liberalism XX being XXXXXXXX XX specific elements XXXX XXXXXX XXXX one another.
Liberalism XX therefore XXXXXXXX under XXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX nations XXX XXX XXXXXX focusing more on the XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXX through imperialism (Mingst &XXX; Snyder, p.73). XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX for XXXX XX XXXXX extremes to XXXXXXXXXX XX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX put forward XX Kant; this approach XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XX XXX interaction of all XXXXXXXXXXX “in XXX XXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXX” (Mingst &XXX; XXXXXX, p.XXX).
The XXXXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX on the three XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX the existing XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX. XX modern XXXXXXX, it is XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX would XX more dominant as Kant XXXXXX that XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXX mean XXXXXXX a XXXXXXX XXXXXX to XXXX XX peace XXX in some circumstances, XX to war (XXXXXX &XXX; XXXXXX, p.XXX). XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX a XXXXX XX beneficial international XXXXXXXXX and ensures that the negativity associated XXXX earlier actions XXXXXX XX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX exerting their power on XXXX XXXXXXXXX states.
Liberalism in today’s world order
XXX world order XXXXX is XX a large extent liberal. XXX features of XXXXXXXXXX in XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXX presence XX XXXXXX consideration XX XXXXXXXX XX hand by XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXX XXXXXXXX XX international bodies, and the XXXXXXX of power politics (Mingst &XXX; XXXXXX, p.XX). XXXXX characteristics XXX XXXXXXX in XXXX international XXXXXXXXX today. XXX XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXX are XXXX considerate XX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XX war and XXXX to XXXXXX positive XXXXXXXXXXXXX between each other while XXXXXXXXX peace as emphasized in XXXXXXXX XXXXXX.
The formation XX XXXXXXXXXXXXX bodies whose significance XX respected by both powerful and XXXX XXXXXXXX nations is XXXXXXX indicator of XXX XXXXXX the XXXXXXX world order XX XXXXXXX. XXX United XXXXXX XXX instance, which XX a superpower XXX has had XXXX title XXX a long XXXX recognizes the XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXX with XXXXX nations through XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX. XXX unity XX also present XXXXXXX XXXXX powerful nations like Japan and others that XXXX in the Atlantic region (Mingst &XXX; XXXXXX, p.77).
Since XXX Second XXXXX XXX, XXXXXXXXX XXXX XX XXXX realized XXX XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXX XX, despite the XXXX that XXXXX XXXX XXXX instances of a strain in XXXXXXXXX state’s XXXXXXXXXXXXX, none XXX XXXX quite to the XXXXX XX XXXXXXXX XX earlier XXXX. What makes XXXX XXXXXXXX is the adoption XX liberal theories among XXXXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXX XX XXX XXXXXXXXXX XX a XXXXXXX approach XXXXXX matters XX XXXXXXXXX (XXXXXX &XXX; Snyder, p.XX).
Liberalism XXX only entails the XXXXXXXXXXXXX between XXXXXXXXX but XXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX to XXXXXXXXXXX of a XXXXXXX by another. XX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX involvement of human XXXXXXX in XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX made XXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX in XXXXXXXXX. XXX XXXXX order XXXXX emphasizes XXX importance XX respecting XXX rights XX XXXXXXXX XX XXXXX country and recognizing XXXX regardless of the country of XXXXXX, XXXX individual XXXXXXXX to be XXXXXXX with XXXXXXX. The abolition XX XXXXXXX XX a good example of XXXXXXXXXX in the XXXXX order XXXXX (Mingst &XXX; XXXXXX, p.XXX). XXXXXXXX XXXXX of human trafficking XXXXXX the XXXX extent XX XXXXXXXXXX, to a large XXXXXX, it is evident that XXXX XXXXXXX XXX significantly reduced in XXXXX’s world order.
XXXX is further XXXXXXXXX XX international bodies meant XX XXXXXXX the XXXXXXXX of each XXXXXXX. XXX United XXXXXXX XXX instance upholds liberalism XX some XXXXXX as it XXXXXXX member states XX show XXXXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXX of each nation and XXXXXX XXXXXXXX signed XXX XXXX treatment XX its people. XXXXXXX XXXXXX to these rules outlined in these international bodies XXXXXXX XX their interests. Working with other countries provides XXXXXX benefits that inform the XXXXXX XX take on XXXXXXXX liberalism XX engage in beneficial matters rather than war (XXXXXX &XXX; Snyder, p.129). By XXXXXXXX XXXXX international XXXXXX XX be XXXXXXX XX and which XXXXXXXX are beneficial, the liberal order is XXX as each country XXXXX XXXXX independent decision.
The current XXXXX with religion XX XXXXXXX evidence of how XXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX order has XXXX to XXXXX XXXXXXX. XX XXXXXXX centuries, XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX imposed on nations XX colonialists XXXXXXXXXXXX the XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXX XX XXXX XXXXXX. XXXX nations XXX societies XXXX forced XX take on XXX XXXXXXXX of XXX colonialists disregarding their XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX to choose XXXXX beliefs including what religion XXXXX to them (Mingst & XXXXXX, p.XXX). However, today, respect XX XXXXX to XXXX state’s XXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXX of XXXXXXXX, and matters XX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXX carried out to avoid instances of bias against a specific religion.
Kant’s XXXXXXXXXXX on XXXXXXXXXX considers a XXXXXXXXX where all XXXXXXX XXXXXX in oneness XX a “XXXXXXXXX of mankind” (XXXXXX & Snyder, p.128). XXXX XXXXXXXXXX is witnessed when nations XXX able XX XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX actions in the XXX XX XXXXXX. XXXXXX away a XXXXXXX’s right XX XXXXXX itself is XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXX a helping hand in a bad situation. XXXXXX in XXX XXXX XXX where the legitimacy of the XXXXXXX of XXXXXXX involved was XXXXXXXXXXXX, XXX XXXXX order today XXXXXXXX the XXXXXX to engage in XXXXXXXXXXXX activities with no XXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXX. This XX XXXXXXXXXXX XX XXX presence XX international XXXXXX XXXX the UN (Mingst &XXX; Snyder, p.112).
XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX order XXXXX XX featured by all XXX elements XX XXXXXXXXXX. XXX extent of its application XX XXXXXXXXXXXXX by XXXXXXXX XX all three forms of XXXXXXXXXX described XXXXXXX. There have XXXX XXXXXXXXX where nations have XXXX XXX XXXXXXX decision to go XX XXX XX protect XXX XXXXXXXX, instances where the XXXXXX of XXXXX XXXXXX XXXX reasonable XXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXX and a time when the XXXX chosen XXX to maintain a balance between the XXX (Mingst &XXX; XXXXXX, p.213). XXX XXXXXX factor XX that in XXX these situations, the XXXX that XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX community was looked XX XX a XXXXXXX is irrefutable.
XXXX in cases XXXXX the most extreme XXXXXXX XXX taken by a nation XX fight XXX XXXXX XXXXXXXX, liberalism is still in practice. To be liberal XXXXX being able to XXXX independent XXXXXXXXX after XXXXXXXXXXXXX of XXX XXXX XXXXXXX or XX a XXXXXXXXXXX of an attack made XX a XXXXXXX’s XXXXXXXXXX. In XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX, XXXXX of XXXXXXXXX have been prevalent XXXXXXX XX XX driven XX a XXXX XX XXXXXXXXX. XXXXXXXXX puts the XXXXXXXX XXXXXX in an unfortunate situation to XXXXXXXX them XX meet XXX XXXXXXX XX XXX attacker (Mingst &XXX; Snyder, p.XXX). XXXXXXXX XXXX bruises the XXXXX that XXX been fought for XXXXX in international relations, it XXXXXX XX show XXXX countries have come a long XXX to XXXXXX liberal status.
At the XXXXXX of international XXXXXXXXX activities is economic XXXXXXXXXX. Nations across XXX world XXXXXX in economic activities XX XXXX XXXXXXX and receive XXXXXXXXX XXXXXX but XXX found within their country. With knowledge XX how XXXXXXXXX XXXX XX, countries adopt necessary XXXXXXXX XX ensure a healthy diplomatic XXXXXXXXXXXX is established between them XXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXX. Most features XX XXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX amongst nation’s XXXXX shows elements XX XXXXXXXXXX. XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX trade XXXXXXXX, the XXXXXXXXXXX of both XXXXX and XXXXXXXXXXXXX factors in trade, XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX XX the welfare XX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX community, XXX a XXXXXXX XXXXX of XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXX of dynamic XXXXXXX at play (XXXXXX &XXX; Snyder, XXX). XXX these provide evidence XX XXX liberal XXXXX XXXXXXXX in the present XXXXX order.
Conclusion
XXXXXXXXXX in international XXXXXXXXX XX a XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX by avoidance of XXXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX nations, and the XXXXXXXXXXX of XXXXXX XXXXXXXX with consideration placed on XXX right XX each country XX make liberal XXXXXXXXX. XXX current XXXXX order XXX to a XXXXX extent XXXXXX liberal. Compared XX earlier XXXXXXXXX where superpowers could XXXX for XXXXX XXXXXXXX in XXXXX XXXXXXXXX XX XXX expense XX peace, the XXXXXXXXX of international XXXXXX XXXXX ensures XXXX XXX rights XX each nation XXX XXXXXXXXX and XXX XXXXXXX XX all XXXXX (XXXXXX & XXXXXX, p.25). XXX freedom XX choose XXXXXXXX XXX respect XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXX origin also indicates the XXXXXX in liberalism. XXXXXX, the XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX characterized XX harmony and XXX XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXX welfare is XXXXXXX evidence of XXX extent XX XXXXX XXX XXXXX order has become liberal.
Work XXXXX
XXXXXX XXXXX and Snyder JackXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX in World Politics. XXXXXXXXX 2019