Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How does constructivism pose a threat to realism
Constructivism in international relations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How does constructivism pose a threat to realism
Constructivism Explained in Venezuela Protests 2014
Young people covering their faces from tear gas bombs, being transported by the national police covered in blood, and holding SOS signs are only a few of the images that have been flooding social media for what is now being called the “Venezuela Spring”. The series of protests, political demonstrations and civil unrest are today entering its second week, and as the death count keeps rising, so does the tremendous international media campaign. These young Venezuelans students, with the help of the opposition political party are fighting for their right to food and civilian security. Since their government is not providing them with the latter, they want a regime change. The current government is not threatened by any of these actions, and instead is warning the Venezuelan people that these protests neither will nor resolve the economic, social, and political problems and instead will prolong the crisis. If we used typical international relation theories, for example realism, that claims that states cannot assume any changes unless there is a self-centered motive involved, this cannot accurately explain the behavior that is happening in Venezuela. Using the two actors of right and left Venezuelans, in this paper I aim to argue what ways the international relations theory of constructivism explains the outbreak of the Venezuelan protest.
Constructivism is the claim that the world is not given to us in facts, but socially constructed (Barnett, 2009). Meaning that values and ideals didn’t just come from nature, therefore it can be torn apart so we find the origin of how it came about (Wendt, 1992).
Another important aspect of constructivism is that it examines the different identit...
... middle of paper ...
.... There have been protests in Latin America that started out this small and succeeded in deteriorating the regimes.
The real question is how will this work out in the long term. While I do not believe that left-winged (Chavistas) will tire out and change sides, since they are the majority. It seems unlikely that the far right, violent sector of opposition will achieve its goal of forcing Maduro to resign, yet its also hard for the current government to move forward. The level of organization of the protesters here is something to admire. The protestors that are educated connected and inspired by new norms and ideas have inspired and constructed new values to other Venezuelans. Therefore, despite if the protestors get to accomplish the main idea behind the coup or not, constructivism is an important theory that can explain the outbreaks of the protests in Venezuela.
The Mexican Independence and the Venezuela Crisis have some things in common. Both historical events have short and long term effects. Both of these events were also influenced by ethical beliefs.
Gott, Richard. 2013. "Man against the world: as illness ends Hugo Chavez's rule in Venezuela, what will his legacy be? Here, Richard Gott argues he brought hope to a continent--while overleaf, Rory Carroll asks if the price of change was too high. (Cover story)." New Statesman (1996), 2013. 20. Academic OneFile, EBSCOhost (accessed December 2, 2013).
On July 14th, 17189, a shot was heard around the world: the Bastille had been stormed. Propelled by Enlightenment ideas, a rigid class system, and resentment with the monarchy, on this day the French decided to take matters in their own hands. In the next three years, the French overthrew their monarch and established a government and constitution that promised equal rights for all. As the saying goes, history repeats itself. So was the case in Latin America. By 1810, revolutionary fervor had spread to Venezuela. The revolution here was caused by similar reasons. As a colony of Spain, Venezuela did not have a representational government or equality for all its citizens. Peninsulares, or European-born Spaniards, held all the important governmental positions. Like the nobility in France, Peninsulares did not have to pay taxes. Their children (as long as they were also born in Europe), had many educational opportunities. Below the peninsulares were the creoles, or Venezuelans of Spanish descent. Creoles owned much of the land, but they were considered inferior to the peninsulares. Like the bourgeoisie in France, creoles had to pay high taxes and were subject to strict regulation. Creoles were disappointed in what they saw as social and political inequality, and desired to obtain self-representation in the government. At first hesitant, creoles declared their independence amid the weakening of the Spanish crown and the spread of the Enlightenment ideas. The Venezuelan Revolution was influenced by the French Revolution by the spread of Enlightenment ideas, social inequality, the discontent of creoles, and their desire to gain independence from France and form a new democratic government.
When Mexican President Vincente Fox rode into office on a wave of popular support in 2000, he inherited the Zapatista rebellion in Chiapas. In 1994, the largely indigenous Zapatista movement began a military campaign to protest economic and political disenfranchisement. Vincente Fox claimed that he could solve the Zapatista uprising in “15 minutes.” Like his predecessor, he has failed to solve the problem. How did the Zapatistas achieve such longevity in the confines of the “perfect dictatorship?”
... was not the best person on Earth, nor was he the worst person as portrayed in the news. The same type of repetition and emphasizing could have been done to portray Hugo Chavez as the greatest leader in the world. If Hugo Chavez actions and objectives were more publicize, then his representation in the media would not have been a evil dictator who is against the U.S, rather it would be man who wanted to help the poor and tried to find peace within nations. Stone states that “the changes that occurred in Venezuela reflect the true spirit of the country’s people. Venezuela was ranked 7.6 on a scale of 1 to 10, in the level of democracy. They placed their democracy higher than any other Latin American.” Stone, Scott, Boykoff, Sheehan, and Dwyer represent Hugo Chavez as a victim of media corruption, but a fighter for still succeeding while being targeted.
Social constructivism is defined as the perspective that focuses on people's collective efforts to impose meaning on the world (1). The experiences a person goes through on a daily basis helps shape there perspectives. There are several benefits with social constructivism along with a few disadvantages. The main benefits being that it helps students learn and enjoy more when they are involved rather than sitting behind a desk and just listening
Because of its many facets and definitions, constructivism is in a constant state of battlement. All in all, constructivism is a new approach to education that has put education persons on the fence. Either they whole heartedly believe that constructivism is the key to overhauling our education system, or they don’t believe that constructivism has enough merit to change our system. Because there is still a strong representation of opposition against the methodology of constructivism it is my strong opinion that constructivism will not be fully immersed in our education system for years to
A great revolutionary once said, “The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall.” The revolutionary in this quote, Che Guevara, epitomizes the notion that revolutions are not a random occurrence but rather a continuous push for a fundamental change. In the framework of revolutions that have occurred in the world, most notably those that have occurred in Britain, America, France, and Haiti; one realizes that the elements of competition and mass mobilization are intrinsic to understanding the successes of each revolutionary movement. Yet, the catalysts and societal implications for each of these revolutions provides different venues of implementation that separates it from others.
“Revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall.” It is believed that any individual who advocates or takes part in a revolution dreams to change not only the world but the ‘man’ itself. These revolutionists dream not only of transforming social structures, institutions, and the system of government but also produce a profound, radical and independent ‘man’.2 With the development of these ideologies, certain methods are partaken in achieving their desired goal. Some will seek the path of pacifism while others proponent a violent revolution when achieving these ideology. Growing up we have been taught that violence cannot solve any problems it only makes it worse. But can one claim that these violent desired to bring revolution to be unethical? If so, imagine how Cuba would be like if it wasn’t for the 26th of July Movement; how colored people would be treated without Malcolm X’s attitude toward racism.
So making a revolution is not a very easy thing. But if a revolution is necessary, the three ingredients (a good cause, good organization, and a good outcome) will definitely lead you to a successful revolution. The cuban revolution had all these ingredients,but they added more. The Castro team of fighter really put their heart and soul into fighting for their country. Over 5,000 people sacrificed their lives for their country. And just think how much much more the cuban people needed to revolt then the americans needed to revolt. Even though the cubans had a bigger cause to revolt, the people in both revolutions were incredible people, putting their lives on the line. What will the next revolt be about? Government? Food? In any revolution, the 3 ingredients will be visible, and with passion, devotion, and respect from the fighters, a revolution is born!
Hugo Chavez was a powerful and positive force in addressing social issues, however, his singular focus on social issues at the expense of other matters of the country left the Venezuelan economy in tatters. In 1998, 50.4% of the Venezuelan population was living below the poverty line, where as in 2006 the numbers dropped to 36.3% (Chavez leaves). Although he aggressively confronted the issue of poverty in Venezuela, many other problems were worsened. Some Chavez critics say he used the state oil company like a piggy bank for projects: funding homes, and healthcare while neglecting oil infrastructure and production. Without growth in the oil ind...
As a result, with the passing of the years Chavez created an atmosphere of division, violence and unrest within the population. Thus, created a marked difference between the supporters and opponents of his policies, a situation that President Hugo Chavez took advantage of for his own purposes, deploying a communist regime disguised as a socialist. In other words, Chavez tricked Venezuela’s people, offering the establishment of a socialism that was nothing more than a dictatorship adapted to their own purposes, becoming the most recognized leader of the left worldwide. Throughout the fourteen years that he remained in power, Chávez followed a strategy of introducing a socialist government in Venezuela in stages. According to Enrique Standish in the article titled “Venezuela Finally Turns Communist” it happened in four stages.
The creation of the study of international relations in the early 20th century has allowed multiple political theories to be compared, contrasted, debated, and argued against one another for the past century. These theories were created based on certain understandings of human principles or social nature and project these concepts onto the international system. They examine the international political structure and thrive to predict or explain how states will react under certain situations, pressures, and threats. Two of the most popular theories are known as constructivism and realism. When compared, these theories are different in many ways and argue on a range of topics. The topics include the role of the individual and the use of empirical data or science to explain rationally. They also have different ideological approaches to political structure, political groups, and the idea that international relations are in an environment of anarchy.
Constructivism is a method that says students learn by building their schema by adding to their prior knowledge by the use of scaffolding (Rhinehart Neas). Because the students are basically teaching themselves new information, the teacher is there mainly for support and guidance for the students.
Without taking other factors into account, it would seem like the realist theory would be the best way to describe international relations and even everyday life at a lower scale. Throughout recent years however, constructivism has become more widely accepted because there are other factors that effect the wants and needs of people. Norms and culture change throughout history which is the main reason constructivism has become a more accepted theory throughout international relations (Beinur, 2011, p.