Sunday, January 26, 2020

Is Neo-Liberalism closer to Neo-Realism than it is to traditional Pluralism?

Is Neo-Liberalism closer to Neo-Realism than it is to traditional Pluralism? Is Neo-Liberalism closer to Neo-Realism than it is to traditional Pluralism? The paradigm of pluralism originated during the 1970s by writers such as Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, as they sought to establish an alternative to traditional realism. Through works such as, Transnational Relations and World Politics, and, Power and Interdependence, Keohane and Nye explained their concepts of transnationalism, multiple access channels and complex interdependence which expanded theoretical pluralism. Their analyses, which studies in these books conclude that through studying foreign policy, decision-making showed that the premise of the unitary nature of the state had now become untenable. In 1979, Kenneth Waltz, a neo-realist, introduced a new approach, through his book, Theory of International Politics, which looked at international relations in a more structural and methodological perspective, while keeping to the same state-centric view of traditional realists such as Hans Morgenthau. Neo-liberalism being the most modern of the three paradigms, established in t he 1980s, takes key concepts from both pluralism and neo-realism but goes further and incorporates the ability of cooperation occurring in an anarchical international system. In order to assess whether neo-liberalism is closer to neo-realism than it is to traditional pluralism, it is firstly important to define the three paradigms, consider the important elements of neo-liberalism and to analyse the similarities and differences it has to the other two paradigms. It is also important to examine the arguments for and against the notion of neo-liberalism being closer to neo-realism, which would help to gauge to what extent neo-liberalism is closer to neo-realism. During the 1960s and 1970s, changes to the world structure started occurring as the role of non-state actors, for example the European Economic Community and multinational companies, had greater significance. In, Transnational Relations and World Politics, Keohane and Nye argue that a definition of politics in terms of state behaviour alone may lead us to ignore important non-governmental actors that allocate view. It is clear that from a pluralistic view, states as well as non-state actors all contribute to world politics and it is this fundamental assumption, which clearly challenges and distinguishes itself from realism. Furthermore, states are not seen as the single most important actors in international politics, as they often can not regulate all other cross-border transactions. Nye argues, A good deal of intersocietal intercourse takes place without governmental controlstates are by no means the only actors in world politics. This emphasises the pluralist theory that states do not act in a unitary fashion, rather the state is fragmented and, composed of competing individuals, interest groups and bureaucracies, which shape state policy. Transnational co-operation was needed to respond to common problems and co-operation in one sector would inevitably lead to co-operation in other sectors and as a result, the effects of transnational relations are becoming more important and pervasive. In the 1970s, the liberal pluralists highlighted the understanding of non-state actors, undermining the state-centric world of realism. Keohane and Nye claimed that world politics was no longer the exclusive preserve of states and that, the growth of transnational organizations has lead to the state-centric paradigm becoming progressively inadequate, therefore a new theory called complex interdependence was introduced to run as an alternative to realism. This theory has three key assumptions the first was introduced, being that the state is not a unitary actor but there are multiple channels of access between societies. In, Power and Interdependence, Keohane and Nye argue that these channels include, informal ties between governmental elites; informal ties among non-governmental elites and transnational elites and transnational organizations. The second feature of the theory is that though military force is an important issue; from a pluralistic perspective it does not dominate the a genda. The paradigm allows for a multiple of issues to arise in international relations compared to the neo-realist concept, where it emphasises the military and security issues which dominate international politics. Pluralists have a low salience of force and believe that actors have different influences on different issue areas. Therefore pluralists argue that military power is not the only factor indicating how powerful a state is. The final assumption considers the fact that there is no hierarchy of issues; therefore any issue area might be at the top of the international agenda at any one time. This emphasises the second assumption of complex interdependence that, military security does not consistently dominate the agenda, furthermore, with the complicated interactions between various sub-state actors, the boundary between domestic and foreign politics becomes obscure, such that traditionally low political issues, for example the environment and the economy take greater signif icance in the domain of international politics. The neo-realist reply to the pluralist challenges came in the form of a structuralist theory which regarded international systems to be either hierarchical or anarchical in nature. The distinction between hierarchical and anarchical is crucial to Waltz, who argued that the present international system was anarchical in nature and the pluralist challenge had failed to provide sufficient grounds to suggest that the system had changed fundamentally; therefore underlying the reality of the system remained in tact. Neo-realism deems the anarchic system has led to a self help system which lacks authority. He says, each unit seeks its own good: the result of a number of units simultaneously doing so transcends the motives and aims of the separate units. Therefore, states are only able to survive if they increase their military capabilities, which will enhance their security. This is directly criticised by pluralists as they argue that liberal democracies are more pacifist and the fact that more states are becoming liberal democracies, shows the potential for changing the structure of the international system, and they claim that, when complex interdependence prevails military force is not used. However, in his critique of transnational and other pluralist efforts, Waltz raises an important idea. He defies the challenge of the state-centric paradigm by saying that students of transnational phenomena have developed no distinct theory of their subject matter or of international politics in general. Keohane argues this critique by pointing out that for concepts such as transnational relations to be valuable; a general theory of world politics is needed. Neo-realism contains analogies from economics, especially the theory of markets and the firm where the market is a structure and exists independent of the wishes of the buyers and sellers who nonetheless create it by their actions. Waltz states, international political systems, like economics markets, are formed by the co-action of self-regarding units. This overall perspective draws its central ethos from the discipline of economics and rational choice assumptions. However, even pluralists like Keohane soon accepted the neo-realist concepts of the international system being anarchic in nature and states as the principle actors in it. Therefore, he repositioned himself to neo-liberalism, moving away from his previous pluralistic concerns of interdependence and transnational relations. The debate between the two came to be known as the neo-neo debate since there appeared to be a convergence between the two positions. The foundation of neo-liberalism is that states need to develop strategies and forums for co-operation over a whole set of new issues and areas and this has been facilitated by the fact that regimes, treaties and institutions have multiplied over the past two to three decades. Thus the pluralists of the 1970s such as Keohane and Nye have become the neo-liberals of today and in the process have become quite close to the neo-realists. Neo-liberalisms acceptance of anarchic principles, states becoming the principal actors and the adherence to the importance of rational choice further highlights the close intellectual position with neo-realists. Nevertheless, despite this neo-liberals are trying to distinguish themselves from neo-realists when including the notion of co-operation. Neo-liberals have concerned themselves with analysing the extent of co-operation possible under conditions of anarchy and the conclusions that the two sides reach are radically different. Neo-realists claim that under anarchy, conflict and the struggle for power are enduring characteristics of international politics, and that because of this, co-operation between states is at best precarious and at worst non-existent. Neo-liberals agree that achieving co-operation is difficult in international relations but disagree with neo-realists pessimism of it not being able to occur effectively in an anarchical system. In Keohanes book, After Hegemo ny, he claims that, Cooperation requires that the actions of separate individuals or organizations be brought into conformity with one another through a process of negotiation. Neo-liberalism goes further and claims that co-operation could be increased through establishment of international regimes and the exchange of information. They see regimes as the mediator and the means to achieve cooperation in the international system. According to neo-liberals, institutions can exert casual force on international relations, shaping state preference and locking states into cooperative arrangements. However, neo-realists doubt that international regimes have the ability to do this efficiently, if not at all. Their pessimistic view of international relations put forward the argument that states must stress security to promote their own survival. The neo-liberal view is that though there is an anarchic system in place; institutions have the ability to, encourage multilateralism and cooperation as a means of securing national interests. However, they do concede that cooperation may be difficult to achieve in areas where leaders perceive to have no mutual interests. Thus, there is a difference of opinion between neo-liberals and neo-realists on the notion of international regimes. The former believes that regimes can only persist so long as states have mutual interests, while the latter argues that only with a hegemon in place, can a regime work effectively. Despite their differences over the question of co-operation in the international system, both neo-realism and neo-liberalism are rationalist theories; both are constructed upon assumptions held in micro-economic theory that the main units in the international system, states, are assumed to be self-interested and rational and act in a unitary fashion. Neo-liberals accept the basic neo-realist assumptions of international anarchy and the rational egoism of states. However, their aim is to show that to an extent rational actors can co-operate even when anarchy in the system prevails. The issue of gains is a key difference in this debate as neo-liberals assume that states focus primarily on their individual absolute gains and are indifferent to the gains of others. Whether co-operation results in a relative gain or loss is not very important to a state as far as neo-liberalism is concerned, so long as it produces an absolute gain. In contrast, neo-realists, such as Waltz, argue that stat es are concerned with relative gains, rather than absolute gains and a states utility is at least partly a function of some relative measure such as power. Furthermore, the acceptance of states being rational actors allows the enactment of game theory, thus allowing the behaviour of states to be foreseen, aiding the scientific rigour of neo-liberalism. It is arguable therefore, that neo-liberalism is a doctrine that is close to both neo-realism and traditional pluralism. It is the most contemporary of the paradigms and thus has been able to take key concepts from both neo-realism and traditional pluralism to produce a new theory of international relations. However, pluralism still has strong similarities with neo-liberalism in that they both agree on the concept of different issues areas that are not necessarily military based, such as economic welfare, whereas neo-realists concentrate on military issues which they identify as being high on the political agenda. Therefore, there are no hierarchical issue areas in contrast to neo-realism where military and the struggle for power is at the top of the agenda. Furthermore both paradigms show optimism on the concept of cooperation occurring in international politics. However, it is arguable that neo-liberals have abandoned the pluralist thought of the state not being the principal actor s in international relations. Here, neo-liberals have concurred with the neo-realist state-centric view; with states being described as rational actors. To a greater extent, it is the key concept for the ability of cooperation to occur in an anarchical system which distinguishes neo-liberalism from the other two paradigms, especially neo-realism, whereby cooperation can be mitigated through the establishment of international regimes and institutions. The differences on cooperation are clearly evident between neo-liberalism and neo-realism as the latter paradigm is pessimistic, in arguing that under anarchy cooperation would be very difficult to achieve. This emphasises the autonomous nature of neo-liberalism and it now becoming the main challenger to the traditional realist paradigm. BIBLIOGRAPHY Burchill, Scott Theories of International Relations (Basingstoke:  Palgrave Macmillan,  2005) pp.64-70 Kauppi, Mark and Viotti, Paul International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond (Boston ; London: Allyn and Bacon, 1999) pp.199-204 Keohane, Robert O. After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world political economy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005) pp.51-63 Keohane, Robert O. The Demand for International Regimes in Krasner, Stephen International Regimes (Ithaca;  London:  Cornell University Press, 1983) pp. Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S. Transnational relations and World Politics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973) pp. ix-xxix Keohane, Robert O., Institutional Theory and the Realist Challenge After the Cold War in Baldwin, David Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993) pp. 269-300 Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S. Power and Interdependence (New York; London: Longman, 2001) pp. 19-27 Lamy, Stephen Contemporary Mainstream Approaches: Neo-Realism and Neo-Liberalism in Baylis, John and Smith, Steve (eds.) The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005) p.207-218 Little, Richard, International Regimes in Baylis, John and Smith, Steve (eds.) The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005) pp. 370-380 Waltz, Kenneth Theory of International Politics (Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1979) pp.51-95

Saturday, January 18, 2020

James Joyce’s Araby Essay

James Joyce’s â€Å"Araby† is a story short in length, but long in impact. The unnamed narrator in the story is on the verge of some great discovery, betwixt and between childhood and the world of adults. The playmates with which he interacts, the aunt and uncle that hold dominion over him, and the crush he develops on the pretty sister of a friend are all described through his eyes. While he describes the action, he does so in a wisdom that seems beyond his years, being idealist and innocent and at the same time knowledgeable and jaded. Though the journey the protagonist makes is real, simple, and common, the way the journey is portrayed makes it verge on the mythic and the main character garners many heroic attributes in the tradition of Joseph Campbell’s monomyth. American writer Joseph Campbell was well known not only for his defining of the hero and the hero’s journey, but also his appreciation and admiration for the work of James Joyce. In the work of Joyce, he saw many of the critical elements that comprised the hero’s journey or the monomyth, which added impact to an otherwise simple coming-of-age story. Instead of being just a simple trip to the bazaar, the protagonist of Joyce’s â€Å"Araby† is forced to endure many of the trials and events that befall all heroes. Campbell helped define what makes a hero in his 1949 book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, by stating: â€Å"A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man† (30). In other words, Joyce’s protagonist in â€Å"Araby† has enacted multiple parts of the mythic initiation of the hero-redeemer, who, according to Campbell, undergoes separation, initiation, and returns with a boon for his people. According to Martha Fodaski Black, â€Å"In ‘Araby’ the boy separates himself from the other Dubliners, undergoing the trials and tests of the often hostile environment of the Dublin streets at night; the main character has his moment of ironic enlightenment at the bazaar†¦although the boy does not return to his people, the story is itself the boon that Joyce brought to the Irish† (129). Even despite not fitting Campbell’s definition of the hero’s journey to the letter, there remain many aspects of it that are too glaring to ignore. The narrator in â€Å"Araby† personifies youthful idealism, fantasy, and confusion, which at first seems to negate the status as a hero embarking on a hero’s journey. However, when viewed through the eyes of Campbell, the trip to the bazaar for the young man, as well as the overwhelming desire that precedes it, are parts of the hero’s journey. The call to adventure is put forth by Mangan’s sister, who originally places the idea into the head of the young man about the bazaar. While she cannot go to the bazaar, he promises that he will go and return with something from the bazaar, which is very similar to the concept of the boon for the people. With his intense feelings, adolescent and confusing as they may be, the narrator is presented with a task that he feels obligated to complete, no matter the costs. This becomes his all-consuming passion, and every other aspect of his life in the story takes on a whole new meaning, becoming a mythological quest for something magical and transcendent. Even in his everyday tasks the narrator creates something fantastic, and making his way through the crowded streets carrying groceries he sees a different romantic reality: â€Å"I imagined that I bore my chalice safely through a throng of foes† (Joyce 31). The way he romanticizes his friend Mangan’s sister goes far beyond the realm of reality, though he has little idea why he feels like he does. When she finally becomes reality and speaks to him, he is overwhelmed by it. Yet, he confronts adult reality with full force, following the urges brought on by his burgeoning sexual awareness. By, going on the quest to Araby, his idealism and fantasy are replaced with the cold realization of adulthood and the reality of the world around him. All of the other characters in Araby simply support the narrator’s rising consciousness and often fit the Campbell’s definition of helpers, and sometimes as tests and enemies to be overcome. The narrator’s aunt and uncle act as surrogates for authority figures, and their contradictions, but he still appeals to them after he receives his original call to adventure. Their authority comes to bear on the narrator when he waits for his uncle to get home to go to the bazaar with him, only to be let down when he fails to show up on time. The waiting could be a test for the narrator, and he manages to pass despite the anxiety and trepidation it caused. The pious and fair aunt is complimented with the partially irresponsible but benevolent uncle, and though their help is limited and largely debatable, their gentle support finally allows the narrator to make it to the bazaar. However, unlike the supernatural helpers in many myths, the helpers in â€Å"Araby† are very human, and it is collectively the fault of the narrator’s uncle and aunt that he got to the bazaar so late; though they are also the reason he was able to go, showing the control that authority has over all and their important position in his life. Once the boy is allowed to go on his journey alone, more elements of the hero’s journey come into play. The train ride that the boy embarks upon can be seen as Campbell’s crossing of the threshold to adventure. The ride itself is something that the boy must endure in order to get to the world he wishes to find, yet another test in a series of tests. However, once at the bazaar, the boy’s heroic journey takes a disheartening turn, as he realizes that much of his youthful excitement and anticipation for the journey were misinformed. He finds more tests and trials in the special environment of the bazaar, contending with ignorant clerks that do not merit his respect or business, though this is nothing more than a statement of childish innocence being replaced with the harsh reality of adulthood. In the end, the most important part of the narrator’s hero journey is not actually making it to the bazaar, nor retrieving the item he promised to Mangan’s sister, but it is the actual knowledge he gained because of the journey. Despite the help of some characters and the opposition of others, the narrator was able to grow in his knowledge and appreciation of the adult world. In initiating the boy’s hero’s journey, Mangan’s sister is the most important character in the story, not so much for who she is but what she is. She is the symbol of the narrator’s idealized view of life. She is everything romantic to him, while she most likely has no idea that he feels this way. Other than the narrator, all of the characters view the world as it is, realizing the obligations of life are more important than idealized fantasies; Mangan’s sister cannot go to Araby because of her convent’s retreat, the uncle tends to his own affairs before the narrator’s, and the aunt only wants to see him safe and happy. When the bazaar turns out horribly for the narrator, he realizes that his romantic view of the world was not only wrong, but may have even been vain because of he failed to see the world like everyone else did. He realizes that the reality of his life and the people in it were far more simple than he imagined, a sentiment that clearly marks his transformation from child to man: â€Å"From the vantage point of maturity the narrator can realize that the aunt and uncle perhaps once possessed an awareness of the romantic, and awareness that has since been clouded by the drabness of North Richmond Street† (Cockelreas & Logan). The ultimate irony of the boy is that to finally achieve adulthood, he was robbed of his joy and his imagination and received only painful revelation in return. Joseph’s Campbell’s heroic journey can be seen in many works of literature, from the common myths of ancient times to the modernist writing of James Joyce. Whether it is the complex story of a human fighting supernatural elements or the simple story of a boy going to a bazaar, any character can be construed as a hero and the journey heroic. Works Cited: Black, Martha Fodaski Shaw and Joyce: â€Å"The Last Word in Stolentelling. † Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1995. Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949. Cockelreas, J & Logan, D. â€Å"The Ironic Narrator in James Joyce’s ‘Araby’. † Writing Essays About Literature. A Literary Rhetoric. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Joyce, James. â€Å"Araby. † Dubliners. New York: Penguin Books, 1967.

Friday, January 10, 2020

Biography of General Douglas Haig

One of the worst ones was when he sent a lot ot troops to an unsuccessful offensive on the Somme River in July-November 1916, which lead to 420,000 British casualties. The Battle of the Somme was one of the largest battles that happened in World War 1 and it was the bloodiest war that happened. HIS strategy of attrition (â€Å"kill more Germans†) also resulted in enormous numbers of British casualties. Yet another flawed plan had been hatched by General Haig in an attempt to defeat the Germans on the French and Belgian Flanders in 1917. This attack was also known as the Third Battle of Ypres.It was a significant attack and a rather large one for It was estimated that 4. 5 million shells were fired from 3,000 guns from the British side. This attack resulted In huge amounts of casualnes for the British. Haig's original plan for this attack was to push across the Gheluvelt Plateau, take the village of Passchendaele. and then break through to open country. But his attack was not s uccessful and the heavy rain that happened generally slowed the attack down. The thick mud in the trenches clogged up rifles and immobilised tanks.Also the fact that he drainage systems there were mainly destroyed due to the bombing that took place there made everything worse. It was believed that the third Ypres offensive was mixed with his personal teelings. General Haig wanted to achieve a British victory without the help of the French because he wanted to embarrass PM David Lloyd George, who had humiliated him earlier and he wanted to prove that the days of the cavalry had not passed through that attack. In general his talth tor cavalry didn't do him a lot ot good, also he was slightly too traditional for he said that the machine gun was a much over rated weapornHowever, his reputation as a great military leader was not wrong. He had lead amazing battles and allowed the British to progress slowly to their victory In 1918. He did exactly this during his attempt to defeat Germans in July-November 1917; though he had only weakened the Germans. it had paved the way for the final assault. He also naa an amazing sense Tor war. He was one 0T tne Tew people wno naa Knew was going to be a long and terrifying war. But his sense had helped him and his country tremendously when he was able to finally defeat the Germans and brought the war to a conclusion before the end of 1918.

Thursday, January 2, 2020

Cost Structure of Hot Rolled Industry Free Essay Example, 3000 words

According to the research findings, it can, therefore, be said that hot roll steel prices have no official controls or policies and they are to be determined by the market. However, there appear to be market flaws and likely cartelization which has given the manufacturers of HR Coils with the larger degree of market authority over the consumers. The users of HR coils, primarily the mills manufacturing cold roll or galvanized sheets or pipes have highlighted to oligopoly pricing performance of the hot roll producing firms. Their main disagreement, as declared by them, is the following: The HR coils manufacturers have intentionally minimized supplies to the local market by selling out abroad considerably high amounts of the product, regardless of the reality that the whole quantity could be consumed in the local market at the cost they are exporting or even at elevated prices. It quarrels that there was a point when the local HR Coils industry was experienced with surplus capacity com ing from a rupture of capacity addition and the simultaneous slowdown in local steel requirement. This was the period when the exports were essential. We will write a custom essay sample on Cost Structure of Hot Rolled Industry or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page According to the user firms, the HR coils manufacturers place prices in unison in infringement of the standard of a competitive market. The price augmentation had no orientation to any explicit modification in the market neither in the demand nor supply side of it. They have also established the worth augments as random having no association with their expenses or any modification in them.