3 Forum responses 200 words each with works cited. The third one is a response to a question. International Relations: International Political Systems.
Post 1:
Globalization is the developing of a world-wide system in which different states embrace a community in which they are connected politically, economically, and, at times culturally. These states exchange goods and act to some extent to the benefit of all. As technology is enhanced, globalization becomes easier to accomplish. Social media, the world-wide web, and the ability to communicate in “real†time have enabled not only people, but governments to act promptly to address issues. Whether or not one believes that globalization is a positive development is basically irrelevant; globalization is happening. While there are many that support the concept of globalization, not everyone is aboard. Some critics fear that NGOs will have increasing power which will affect everyone. Interestingly, the technology that has contributed to the growth of globalization has also been a tool for those protesting against globalization. Included in the targets of protesters are the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Writers have looked at globalization from different points of view. Susan Strange believes that globalization takes away the power of states to control their own currencies, financial markets, and global corporations (Strange, 1997). Martin Wolf is of the notion that although taxation will become more difficult, including taxes that bear no relation to benefits provided, and the fact that states that choose economic integration accept constraints on their actions, globalism will not cause the erosion of states. He believes that states are a necessity, and states that fail, are weak, disorderly or corrupt will be disregarded by the rest of the community (Wolf, 2001). John Stopford looks at Multi-national corporations and the challenge that is needed to regulate them. He believes that they have an ability to exert control “far beyond their legal boundaries†(Stopford, 1998).
Debra Spar does not seem to be adverse to the notion of globalization. One of the faults that critics find is that corporations take advantage of indigent people in their quest for profits. Spar tells us that codes of conduct have been created that address human rights. She believes that these codes can change the behavior of these firms, and tells us that codes of conduct which have already begun to be a significant factor in the pursuit of human rights, along with the help of the ever-ready media will shed sunlight on the acts of corporations. Audrey Cronin, a research specialist in international terrorism at the Library of Congress, while not expressing a problem with globalization, has concern for the very complicated issue of terrorism. She believes that the weakness of the Arab region, the changes happening in globalization, and the disappointing American response to these issues will enable terrorism to continue as a most serious threat to Unites States and Western intern interests. She opines that this threat requires sophisticated strategy and creative thinking, of which there is little. She tells us that the United States, with an arsenal of such tools as intelligence, law enforcement, sanctions, financial controls, foreign aid, and diplomacy, has failed to solve the problem. She finds it ironic that these tools have been a key to the security of the United States and its allies in the last decade and a half. According to Cronin, the complex elements of terrorism are not examined carefully.
She claims that even if a group such as al-Qaeda ceases to exist, the terrorist attacks and their effects will continue if broad-based counterterrorist policies are not enacted.
Begum Burak seems to be a fan of globalization. She claims that states voluntarily give up state-driven economic systems in order to adapt to the world economic structure. This, she believes, is enabled by modern technology such as social media, satellites and the World Wide Web which allow people to see first-hand what is happening. Burak see globalization as a motivator which causes states to engage interactively and this contributes to undermine the importance of territorial borders and permits them to understand the different cultures of states. She does acknowledge the downside issues involved in globalization. Terrorist groups erode public authority, and there are some multinational corporations that take advantage of “legal voids†to become involved in behavior that challenges state sovereignty and bypasses public authority. Burak sums up her position by stating that, as globalization comes to fruition, “international law and international norms and principles gain a more functional role. In a world where the importance of the international law is growing, states feel much more obliged to act in accordance with it. As a result, human-rights violations may be prevented too.
On the other hand, we have Noah Smith, who apparently sees nothing positive about globalization. He reminds us of the many protests around the globe, particularly the attention-getting event in Seattle at the World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference in 1999. The protesters were union workers, environmentalists, labor rights groups, consumer protection groups, and others angry at capitalism. The claim is that rich-country companies invest in countries that donâ€t protect the environment. He mentions China, which he tells us is “choking under hellish smog†but in spite of that, the industrialization of China, and India as well, “has been the biggest and most effective anti-poverty program the world has ever seen. Capitalism has its flaws, but it worksâ€.
The question that is left on the table is where I stand on the issue of globalization. I have read and re-read the arguments, and although they all make good points, I do not believe that globalization is leading to the erosion of the state. I agree with both Debra Spar and Begum Burek. However, I think that, as with all things politic, it will not be a smooth road, and roles as well as policies will change. The major powers may shift a bit, but they will remain major powers; the system will become multipolar. Many states have already seen the advantage of working together on common issues and, as the globe shrinks, this will become more important. The days of colonialism are over, and without military force, there is not much to conquer. Maybe someday we will have battles on the moon! In the meantime, we have some important challenges to address, such as terrorism, regional unrest, and immigration. Of major importance is terrorism as it has the ability to not only cause destruction but affects the lives of many people. It is time for it to come to an end.
Post 2:
While there are very few who would deny the existence of globalization as a phenomenon that is occurring in our international system, there is a variety of opinions in regards to its impact. Some believe that this phenomenon has resulted in an erosion of the state and has placed unprecedented power in the hands of multinational corporations. Others disagree, believing that these organizations are still susceptible to state authority.
Liberal theories regard globalization as a positive process. This is due to their belief that globalization has encouraged economic growth, activity and specialization. This process, according to liberal international relations theorists, not only benefits the big corporations, but also the workers in developing states in which these corporations produce their goods.
Policy makers also view globalization as a positive characteristic in todayâ€s international system. Globalization promotes greater levels of interdependence amongst states, which from a political viewpoint will strengthen ties between societies and decrease the likelihood of violent conflicts happening between them. Policy makers do concede that this may diminish the importance of the state, as greater economic interdependence requires them to attract and maintain international capitol. This in turn, forces them to lower barriers to trade into their state which results in lowering their power and influence over the corporations in the long run.
Realists also do not deny that the process of globalization is taking place and has given more power to non-state actors. The biggest difference in their viewpoint is that they are skeptical as to its ability to diminish conflict throughout the international system. They make the observation that, like any relationship, increased interaction can yield both better relations but also increase friction and give rise to more causes of disagreement between states. Realists also maintain that the erosion of the state is highly exaggerated and that the effect of globalization varies on the state.
Personally, I had trouble deciding as to which argument I found the most convincing. I have very little knowledge of international economics and the workings of multinational corporations. I found myself agreeing and disagreeing with most of the articles that we were assigned this week. For example, Strange argues in her article that globalization has shifted power from states to firms. This has allowed international bureaucracies to undermine accountability by state authorities. She claims that none of these new nonstate actors are accountable and few are even transparent to the public. (Strange 1997, 366-367) She also claims that state authority has declines in three main areas: defense, finance and welfare. (Strange 1997, 368) I agree with this though only to a certain extent. Stopford points out in his article that multinational corporations are in fact not out of government control, as the relationship between the two is complex and based on a distribution of benefits between the two. (Stopford 1998, 22) I found this to be true and it reflects the opinion set forth by Wolf in his article where he says that states have become neither weaker nor less important. (Wolf 2001, 179) He also makes a decent point by stating that “policy, not technology, has determined the extent and pace of international economic integrationâ€. (Wolf 2001, 182) While technology is the vehicle which has enabled globalization and allowed it to rapidly spread, states can easily enforce policies that limit this. Additionally, other “failed states, disorderly states, weak states, and corrupt states are shunned as the black holes of the economic system†and do not see the same effects of globalization. (Wolf 2001, 190) Ultimately, I would have to say that I believe that the authority of the state may be changing, but it has not lessened in its significance to the international system.
As to what I believe is the most important challenge that globalization poses to the role of the nation state today, I have two opinions. The first is based off of Croninâ€s article and my own stance as a member of the military. I believe terrorism will persist in being one of the major challenges we face over the coming years. As Cronin states, “The current wave of international terrorism, characterized by unpredictable and unprecedented threats from nonstate actors, not only is a reaction to globalization but is facilitated by itâ€. (Cronin 2002, 30) The second challenge I perceive is the adaptation of states, the international community and their policies that will force corporations to be held accountable for their actions. This has already begun to occur with the public demanding large, well-known companies to accept responsibility for the labor practices and human rights abuses of their foreign subcontractors. (Spar 1998, 7-8) However, steps need to be taken to ensure that this progress continues and is applied to all multinational corporations and not just the high profile American corporations such as Disney, Reebok, etc.
Post 3 answer this question:
Is there any difference between the state and the nation-state, or both the same?
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount! Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
The post 3-forum-responses-200-words-each-with-works-cited-the-third-one-is-a-response-to-a-question appeared first on Essay Fount.
What Students Are Saying About Us
.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but you proved you are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"
.......... Customer ID: 11***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"This company is the best there is. They saved me so many times, I cannot even keep count. Now I recommend it to all my friends, and none of them have complained about it. The writers here are excellent."
"Order a custom Paper on Similar Assignment at essayfount.com! No Plagiarism! Enjoy 20% Discount!"
