POLS 2783 Lecture Notes - Identitarian Movement, Nsc-68, Free Trade
138 views17 pages
For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.
Theories of Global Politics 1/10/2013 12:00:00 PM
Find connections and links
Economic crisis- ongoing, prolonged
- Cutting back social programs- working class fighting back
- New Revolutions- Arab world
9/11- New security concerned. Rogue states- Iraq, North Korea. Weapons of
mass destruction, terrorism
Human Rights- military conflict. Syria
Neoliberal development policies- free market policies- lots of economic
growth but polarization of rich and poor.
Environmental Crisis- growing concerned
How do we theorize these elements of the world?
What are theories?
Set of concepts or ideas people and academics use to understand the
world or society
Different theories emphasize different things.
Hypothesize that seek fundamental structure or operation
Based on abstraction, drawing links between them
Dominant theory in Canada
Suggestions on how political practice should work
Historical context: 1930‟s/1940‟s US
Why US? Failures in policy, after WW1 strongest economy in world, but
isolated itself from the world. Idea that if countries just interacted with each
other economically it would produce peace too. It was wrong. WW2
*Realistic study of world politics, how it really works not how it should work.
Get away from preferences on how it should work ideally.
Morgenthau: 6 principals *see slide.
Struggle for power
Dark scary world- inherent to human nature, no escape
States must be ready for military conflict. It‟s human nature to produce
Balance of power, between power, have different capacities. Does your
neighbor have a better military? You better build yours up BITCH! **Security
Balance of power drives international politics. This should be the paramount
Critique: post-war period. By people on left.
- Too close to the fire, Done by Americans intellectuals, they didn‟t have the
science it was an ideology, it was designed to support American primacy.
- Inside realist tradition: co-evils- power and politics. Conflicted w/ cold war
ideology which was that capitalism was good it was freedom.
- Purge normative foundation of classical realism- get rid of assumptions
about human nature. Wanted it to be more scientific.
- Waltz- founder. Reject individual or national level. Rid of reductionist.
Wanted to focus on systemic factors. Have to study the state system.
Competing nation-states, they form world politics.
- Anarchy constitutes international state system. Unregulated/ungoverned
- States focus should be to rely on itself. Self help. It pays to be selfish in a
- Concerned with balance of power to ensure survival. National Security
should be the main focus.
- State is the key unit of analysis
- Weak view on the state. Presumes that the state isn‟t impacted by
domestic issues. Cannot treat them as though they are disconnected
- Tends to be militaristic ideologies.
- Treats states all the same – democratic etc. and the difference between
them will differentiate them
- 2nd most dominant.
- Broadening framework, doesn‟t just focus on state and power etc
They look at economics etc.
- Insist politics of states matter, and that the state system can be changed.
Doesn‟t have to be endless war. War is not inevitable
- Can have multinational security. Not self help
- The individual is the focus.
- Supports capitalism the most. It‟s human nature. Freedom. Get something
out of trade.
- Trade investment. Everyone benefits in international trade. More peace.
Interdependence. More wealth all around.
- More development more trade more interdependence.
- Increase international convergence.
- Free trade encouraged
- Political character of states determines how international politics plays out.
- two types of states: Liberal democratic states and non-liberal democratic
- Define states: Liberal states: individual rights protection, they‟re peaceful,
because they are democracies, Democratic caution. If they engage in
violence they will be voted out – that‟s the fear. Encourage peace.
- Non liberal states: Exist in a state of war in non-liberal states. They don‟t
worry about the population. They can just suppress them. More prone to
war. Not accountable to their people.
- Non-liberal and liberal states are in a constant state of war. Liberal states
believe they need to intervene in non-liberal states for humanitarian right. -
- International law disagrees with this. States are sovereign. Liberals believe
they do not deserve their sovereignty.
- Defends capitalism and equal exchanges. However, unequal state powers
manage this system. Certain states given the right to manage the system.
- Calls for military action for humanitarian rights, this in itself…in waging war
- Sometimes serve as ideology of capitalism…not scientific
- Capitalism is not created equally. 500 years of it and it‟s still not equal