Realism has been a broadly accepted dominant theory of international relations during the last 2500 years. It was the publications of ‘Politics Among Nations’ in 1948 by Hans Morgenthau, deeply valued study that introduced what later has become well-known as the classical realistic approach to international politics. However, in 1979 Kenneth Waltz with his book titled ‘Theory of International Politics’ attempted to rediscover a further scientific approach to realism, which presently is known as the theory of Neorealism in IR. For both realists, power is a main fundamental notion in political aspect. However, they are fairly compatible with each other. Morgenthau highlights the influence of human nature upon state behaviour, which seems to be very differing from the view of Waltz theory. With this in mind, this essay will primarily attempt to compare and outline the differences of the Classical theory of Morgenthau from the Neoclassical theory by Kenneth Waltz. To clearly demonstrate the differences between the ideas of the two theorists, the key differences in the essay will be presented under the framework of three individual, state and international system levels. (Jackson and Sørensen, 2013, p96)
This essay will examine some of the core conditions that are required for democracy to flourish. The essay will first consider the “Political awakening”, its importance to the right possession of democratic values, and possible side-effects of its failure. Whereas, the second part will go on to describe Aristotle views towards the existence of a state and its role for the good of citizens; the same part will also explain why the rule of law is more important before the rule of individual citizens. The third part covers the Rousseau opinion on the “General will” and its similarity of Aristotle’s ideology. For the final part, I will attempt to apply those philosophical ideologies on the most recent political developments in the US; Whereas, the first part will focus on Joseph McCarthy, and his political movements in the 1950s of America, and in the second part I will make a comparison McCarthy and Donald Trump, and underline their common approaches to the politics.
In what ways have liberal democratic states in the North deployed state terrorism in the South?
State Terrorism where torture can often be a tool, is considered to be an act of violence accomplished by state authorities against to civilians, in place of instilling fear for political objectives. According to (Blakeley, 2007), during the last few decades many Northern democratic states have used terrorism along with other forms of repression, against millions of civilians in the South. As argued by (Blakeley and Raphael, 2016), the state terrorism deployed by the liberal democratic states from the North to the South is one of coercive tools of neoliberal forms of globalisation to secure and maintain access to resources and markets. Therefore, this essay will argue about the ways liberal democratic states in the North have deployed state terrorism in the South. The first part of the essay will briefly discuss about the political consequences of existing dominant narratives concerning state terrorism. In the second part of the work, the essay will argue that; liberal democratic countries in the north have long history of deploying the state terrorism in the south, using the example of the Indonesian invasion of East Timor, Vietnam and Latin America.
Youth Voice, Youth Choice – Seattle Participatory Budgeting
Location: Seattle, Washington, DC
Number of participants: over 3000
Sponsoring organization: The City Hall of Seattle
The current mayor of the city: Ed Murray
KEYWORDS: Youth / local governance / participatory budgeting
If the XX century can be characterized as a kind of authoritarian era, the same cannot be said about the XXI century. At present, one of the key measure of a state development is determined depending on how democratic the state is and how well the individual rights are secured. The image of authoritarian state is no longer associated to a powerful empire, for example as it was Soviet Union in the previous century, since such a state is seen as an unreliable partner. International organizations such as NATO and European Union, are demanding states to follow democratic values. It is necessary for States to meet a number of criteria, in order to become full-fledged members of the unions. However, in the modern era we are still able to name countries in East Asia, that are non-democratic but have fast economic growth, thus at this pint raises the question: Is democracy necessary to bring development? Therefore, in this article the main topic of discussion will be political regimes, in particular the importance of democracy for development. In the first paragraph I will be writing about political regimes, and how they differ by one another. In second paragraph I will pay more attention for the importance of democracy as a fundamental value of the civilized society and the main precondition for the success of development. Writing this essay I considered different arguments from few trusted sources, as well as my own views and ideas.
Having a political culture, is a necessary precondition for any individual or a nation, in order to enable and maintain direct or indirect connection between government, formal and informal organizations, and in some way to reconcile personal and common interest to each other. In this essay the subject of discussion will be the cultures of the US, Russia, and their origins. In the first part you will read about the core values shared by US citizens and the constitution model in States. In the second part of the essay, the attention will be paid to the Russian political culture, the impact of the past and their drawbacks on the path to a true democracy. To the final bit of the work, you will attempt to make a contrast and comparison of the two countries, based on the noted arguments.