Narizny

4 Pages
107 Views

Department
Political Science
Course Code
POLI 351
Professor
Jason Scott Ferrell

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full 4 pages of the document.
Description
Narizny Ideational theories – these do not provide a satisfying explanation for partisan disagreement over alignment.  Societal debate about Britain’s international strategy was the product of cleavages in its domestic political economy.  Looking to also explain partisan government’s foreign policies Labourites  supported the socialist ideologies of Soviet Russia and opposed the reactionary regime in Germany.  Felt little solidarity with the Soviet regime, found Bolsheviks as extremism, hostile to communists in England. Liberals  Belief in market economics and political freedom was exact opposite to communism, yet they valued cooperation with the Soviets just as much as the Labours.  Belief in equality, progressive institutions, social welfare - support for unemployment insurance, domestic reforms. o Ideals = collective security, advancement of international law.  While they should have backed the French Republic, they wanted harmonious relations with Germany, (ideological affinity) Conservatives  appeased fascism and balanced against communism.  Party of nationalism, tradition and hierarchy – devotion to Anglican Church and monarchy  Internationally their views were embodied by the British Empire. o Should have aligned against what countries posed a threat to the empire  While they should have sided with the German constitutional monarchy, they supported France in reference to cleavages, (ideological affinity). Political Economy Theory  Papayoanou: “Power Ties” – Status Quo vs. Revisionists - *diverse societal interests can be aggregated into consistent national interests o When status quo is strongly interdependent with each other and weakly interdependent with revisionists, they will react aggressively to revisionist’s attempts to overturn the existing international order. o When status quo is strongly interdependent between both, or not strongly so, it will respond with challenges against it with appeasement.  Societal cleavages over alignment (over material interest) o 1) position of individuals exposure to the international economy: if people are exporting to one specific state, they’re going to align with that state to protect their source of income. If the states or markets people are exporting to are threatened, they’re going to align against who’s threatening them.  Complications when there are economic ties with more than one powerful state. Strategic interests harder because aligning with one could hurt or jeopardise relations with another. o 2) Some sectors might have interests in foreign policy that are not bound to a particular state or regional market – eg. Finance  Democratic processes usually ensure that politicians act as if they are mechanistic interest aggregators, even when they aren’t.  Interests of sectoral groups might determine partisan cleavages Political Economy of GB – these are hypotheses, not necessarily written proof of acting upon interests Liberals:  support in north, strong with manufacturing and coal mining (Deeply rooted to Europe) – their alignment strategy should have reflected these interests. Ruled 10 years before the War, overcome by Labour afterwards, coalition. These two competed for the same set of voters, their constituencies has similar economic interests over foreign policy. Both of them should have pursued a strategy designed to promote peaceful, cooperative relations among the continental great powers. Should have sought to ensure all states acted justly in a stable international order due to their reliance on exports to Europe.  **conclusion: electoral support came from industries highly dependent on exports to Europe, wanted to maintain a stable, cooperative international order on the continent. Did not try to prevent war at all costs, instead they sought to defend the status quo against states that threatened the future of the Euro trading system. Until 1914 wouldn’t balance against Germany because they didn’t believe it would act less
More Less
Unlock Document

Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit