Differences Between Liberalism And Constructivism

1738 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Realism, liberalism and constructivism

For this assignment a discussion will be made between Liberalism and Constructivism. How do these concepts work together, are there flaws? Modern Liberalism can be tied to the creation of the President Woodrow Wilson’s speech “The World must be made safe Democracy, Fourteen Points”. One of the points, the last one called for the creation of a League Nations. The purpose of the League was create a forum where na-tions can discuss their differences without resorting to war and to maintain each nation’s politi-cal and territorial integrity. The league turned out to be a failure for three reasons: One the United States, which championed its cause did not join due to an isolationist world view other major nations were excluded such as Russia and Germany, creating a lack of legitimacy and prestige. Second, the lack to authority to have nations contribute military power to enforce its will if economic sanctions did not work. Third, the international community was not ready for a League concept. Another more lasting step toward a permanent forum of Nations came to be After WW II with the creation of the United Nations and other liberal institutions such as W.H.O, W.T.O, I.M.F. and the International Criminal Court and to a lesser extent NATO (Although NATO started out as a military …show more content…

Both the US and the USSR defined and prioritized their identities in terms of what those nations believed was to ul-timate goal of the other, regardless if that was an accurate view. This view of collective securi-ty took a massive hit and re-formulation (which is still going on today) when just before the fall of the Soviet union a Soviet diplomat told his American counter-part “We (the Soviet Union) are about to do a terrible thing to you, we are going to deprive you of an enemy (lipshutz).” The question of who are we was being asked again; is the need of an enemy essential to the defin-ing a nation as a

Show More
Related

  • Soviet Union Dbq

    678 Words  | 2 Pages

    “The distinct differences in the political systems of the two countries often prevented them from reaching a mutual understanding on key policy issues and even, as in the case of the Cuban missile crisis, brought them to the brink of war” (Library of Congress). The Soviet Union and The United States were complete opposites, The United States was a democracy whereas The Soviet Union was a dictatorship. This only began their differences though, their economies, beliefs, goals, and even their fears, everything about them made them different except for their enemy. The

    Read More

  • Autonomy and Political Responsibility after the Cold War

    2605 Words  | 6 Pages

    The alliance formed between the US and USSR during the second world war was not strong enough to overcome the decades of uneasiness which existed between the two ideologically polar opposite countries. With their German enemy defeated, the two emerging nuclear superpowers no longer had any common ground on which to base a political, economical, or any other type of relationship. Tensions ran high as the USSR sought to expand Soviet influence throughout Europe while the US and other Western European nations made their opposition to such actions well known. The Eastern countries already under Soviet rule yearned for their independence, while the Western countries were willing to go to great lengths to limit Soviet expansion. "Containment of 'world revolution' became the watchword of American foreign policy throughout the 1950s a...

    Read More

  • Perceptions and Misperceptions between the United States of America and the USSR during the Early Cold War

    1332 Words  | 3 Pages

    When two people are arguing, it is because both parties believe that they are right while the other is wrong. Similarly, when two people are in disagreement, each side tries to convince the other that their points of view, their values are the right ones. The United States of America, as well as the Soviet Union, believed that they were the most powerful and the rightful country to take control. They both believed that they had to take control of the world or else the other would. To each side, that outcome would be devastating. In this way, perceptions and misperceptions by both the United States and the USSR led both sides to not trusting the other as well as a sense of revenge between them which undoubtedly created misunderstandings. Perception and misperception between the United States and the USSR during the early Cold War is very important because this perception and misperception was what essentially started and continued the conflict.

    Read More

  • Khrushchev's National Security Failure

    1360 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Soviet Union’s most important goal was national security. National security is defined as the protection of a nation from those who want to do it harm, by its government. During the twentieth century when the cold war was at its most tense point, the Soviet Union’s most important goal was national security. It was more important then peace with the United States because if peace with the U.S. meant a decrease in the Soviet Union’s national security than they were open for attack from any other country that wanted to attack them. By keeping the Soviet Union’s national security strong they kept other countries in fear of them, thus creating a fear inspired peace. By focusing on national security tension was created but it also scared both sides into avoiding war at all costs. If the U.S. were to see weakness in the Soviet Union’s national security than the U.S. would have probably been tempted to test the waters and ...

    Read More

  • Life During The Cold War

    955 Words  | 2 Pages

    The relationships of the United States and the Soviet Union were driven by a complex interplay of ideological, political, and economic factors, which led to shifts between cautious cooperation and often bitter superpower rivalry over the years. The distinct differences in the political systems of the two countries often prevented them from reaching a mutual understanding on key policy issues and even, as in the case of the Cuban missile crisis, brought them to the brink of war.

    Read More

  • Eurasia Dbq Essay

    563 Words  | 2 Pages

    The reason why the U.S. was threatened was because, due to post-WWII conditions, the Soviet Union was the only nation that would be able to rival and challenge American power. Chomsky, Barnet, and Swanson contend that the U.S. feared Soviet control over Eurasia because they would take over the Eurasian economy and resources and threaten the survival of capitalism. To some extent this analysis is true. The U.S. economy and capitalism, in general, required free and expansive trade. Without allies and control over Eurasian trade, the U.S. economy would be debilitated. However, as Leffler explains before the U.S. could focus on developing a profitable relationship in Eurasia, they first needed to secure Eurasia from the Soviet Union. This was because the U.S. did not inherently fear the Soviet Union controlling the Eurasian economy and resources; rather, it was what the Soviet Union would be able to do with the economic prosperity that comes from it. With control of the Eurasian economy, the Soviet Union would be able to solve for its manufacturing shortcomings and build up a military force to rival the

    Read More

  • Containment Policy

    1057 Words  | 3 Pages

    In 1945 the United States saw the Soviet Union as its principal ally. By 1947, it saw the Soviet Union as its principal opponent. The United States misunderstood the Soviet regime. .Despite much pretence, national security had not been a major concern of US planners and elected officials. historical records reveal this clearly. Few serious analysts took issue with George Kennan's position that "it is not Russian military power which is threatening us, it is Russian political power" ; or with President Eisenhower's consistent view that the Russians intended no military conquest of Western Europe and that the major role of NATO was to "convey a feeling of confidence to exposed populations, which was suposed to make them sturdier, politically, in their opposition to Communist inroads."

    Read More

  • Controversy Of The Cuban Missile Crisis

    734 Words  | 2 Pages

    To understand the growing controversy between the United States and The Soviet Union, we first must travel back in history. During World War II, most of the world had a common enemy in Germany, the war machine led by Adolf Hitler that was conquering Europe. This United The United States and Russia into one Allied force; however, the distrust was present and rising.

    Read More

  • The League Of Nations And Its Impact On World Peace

    944 Words  | 2 Pages

    Nations lie in the fact that it provided the groundwork for the United Nations. This international alliance, formed in 1895. after World War 2, not only profited by the mistakes of the League but borrowed much of the organizational machinics of the League of Nations. The League of Nations and its impact on world peace. John James Mrs. Hippe History March 7, 1996 Bibliography:..

    Read More

  • How Liberism has Evolved During the 20th Century

    966 Words  | 2 Pages

    Since the 17th century, liberalism has been one of the sources of political progress in the West. Liberalism is a philosophy based on ideas of liberty and quality. Liberalism is hard to define due to the term being used to describe ideas, parties, movements and practices in different societies and different historical periods. The core values of liberalism are individualism, rationalism, freedom, justice and toleration . Liberalism is one of the most powerful ideologies shaping Western Politics. Early Liberalism showed the goals of the fast rising middle class and this have linked liberalism and capitalism. Liberalism has dominated political ideas for almost two decades since the 1970s but the liberal demand of limiting powers of the state has made it seem more radical. In the mid 19th century, Alexis de Tocqueville a historian warned of the dangers of extreme individualism. In this essay, I shall begin by explaining the types of liberalism and close on how they have all changed over the course of the 20th century.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Postmodernism And Constructivism

    1319 Words  | 3 Pages

    The central goal of this work is to discuss postmodernism, constructivism and to attempt to explain the current conflicts that plague Israel and Palestine within the context of what postmodernism and constructivism is. To do this effectively, I believe it is advantageous to the reader that we efficiently define postmodernism and constructivism and to briefly discuss the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts in order to competently put into context how postmodernism and constructivism may explain these crises. That being said, before we delve into this kind of discussion, it is also advantageous to the reader to know that the concepts of postmodernism and constructivism are very abstract and that from this point forward I will refer to postmodernism as

    Read More

  • Are Democratic States More Peaceful?

    2382 Words  | 5 Pages

    Liberalism is universalistic and tolerant. It believes that all persons share fundamental interest in self preservation and material well being. Each individual must be allowed to follow hi s or her own preferences as long as they do not d...

    Read More

  • Liberalism Role in Society

    849 Words  | 2 Pages

    Liberalism is strict the notion of equality for all individuals and the recognition of their voice in society. The source states “at every opportunity, the principles of liberalism should be challenged”. The interpretation of the source would say that is it disagreeing with liberalism and its principles. The source would agree that economic equality, co-operation, and collective interest are the principles that should be seen in society. Since liberalism supports individualism, the source would be agreeing with the opposite of liberalism, collectivism. Collectivism is the notion of the government playing a significant role in society. The source would agree with the philosopher Thomas Hobbes and his idea of complete government control in society. Those who disagree with the source would agree with philosophers like John Locke and Adam Smith and their ideas of being an open society ran by the people. The source would disagree with the notion of a free market economy. The source states that liberalism is the cause of the world’s economic, political, and social inequality. There are many examples in present day history when liberalism is or should have been the way to run a nation or nation-state. In Nazi Germany, liberal principles were ignored leading to the death of many people. Also in history there was the development of labor unions and that significantly changed the working world in a positive way. The source would disagree with labor unions and how it gave the individuals power to enforce liberal principles onto their superiors. Labor unions support the important principles like individual rights, economic freedom, and self-interest. Having liberalism implemented in society has been shown many times to improve society. I fir...

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Liberal And Liberalism

    706 Words  | 2 Pages

    These two political ideologies offer to government leaders, policy makers, and thoughtful citizens a set of guides permitting some semblance of coherent conclusions regarding compelling social, economic and political issues. Their common features include rejection of radicalism and its attending violent uprooting of established instructions and practices, acceptance of the need for restraints on the powers of government, advocacy of balance in society regarding individual rights and social powers, and ultimately some root concerns for individual dignity. Most certainly disagreement abounds between the two woe within the same government framework. This agreement to disagree in a civil manner surely constitutes one of mankind’s most noble achievements.

    Read More

  • The Impact of Liberalism on International Relations

    2018 Words  | 5 Pages

    To start, Liberalism traces its roots back to the Enlightenment period (Mingst, 2008) where many philosophers and thinkers of the time began to question the established status quo. Such as the prevailing belief in religious superstition and began to replace it with a more rational mode of thinking and a belief in the intrinsic goodness of mankind. The Enlightenment period influenced Liberalism’s belief that human beings are thinkers who are able to naturally understand the laws governing human social conduct and by understanding these laws, humans can better their condition and live in harmony with others (Mingst, 2008). Two of the most prominent Liberal Internationalists of the Enlightenment period were Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham who both thought that international relations were conducted in a brutal fashion. It was Kant who compared international relations as “the lawless state of savagery” (Baylis and Smith, 2001, pp 165). It was also Kant who believed nations could form themselves into a sort of united states and overcome international anarchy through this (Mingst, 2008). This was probably the beginning of a coherent belief in a sort of union of sovereign states. Toward the end of the seventeenth century William Penn believed a ‘diet’ (parliament) could be set up in Europe, like the European Union of today (Baylis and Smith, 2001). We can see much of this liberal thinking today in organizations such as the United Nations.

    Read More

More about Differences Between Liberalism And Constructivism

Open Document