The Process of Global Integration - Case Study Example

Realism, Liberalism, and Marxism in the International Political Economy Realism, in the international relations field otherwise known as ‘political realism’, does prioritize issues of national interest and security over the issues of ideology, ethical concerns and the reconstruction of the communities. Realism is a term that is often used in relation to power politics. It is additionally a perception that global politics is usually driven by the competitive self-interests of the participating member countries (Morris, 2003). Liberalism, on the other hand, is a belief among the ruling classes that greatly emphasizes on the significance of their peoples liberty and equalities in their rights. They espouse an extensive array of perceptions which usually depend on their ability to comprehend these philosophies. The liberals usually give support for issues such as free and fair elections, capitalism, freedom of practicing any religion, liberal democracy, the respect for human rights and constitutionalism (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). The proponent of the concept of liberalism who was known as John Locke emphasized on using the law to rule as opposed to the previously witnessed absolutism that was found across many ruling regimes (Rawls, 2005). The liberal philosophy has previously been used in revolutions such as the American and French ones that aimed at eliminating the dictators ruling them. Currently, the newer concept of liberalism is being utilized to ensure that all the future generations will experience timeless freedoms in their activities due to the actions being taken today at achieving this goal (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). Another division of liberalism that is referred to as classical liberalism usually emphasizes on an individual’s independence and the enhancement of their ability of owning property. Their ideologies have greatly argued against the use of direct democracies whereby the majority of the voters form the rules to be applied. It greatly emphasizes that an individual’s right are usually natural, inborn and are independent from any form of government (Rawls, 2005). Marxism is a sociopolitical and a fiscal global perception and an inquiry method that is centered on history’s materialistic interpretations and dialectical perceptions of communal change. It also analyses and greatly critiques the establishment and development of the policies utilized by capitalism. The pioneers of the system were Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who were Germans (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). Marxism covers the Marxian fiscal theory which happens to be a sociological concept and a revolutionary perception of communal changes that have had an influence on many political organizations across the globe. It considers the fiscal activities that are necessary for the provision of man’s basic needs (Wosley, 2002). There are several assumptions that are upheld by realist theorists who state that the realist systems, which are found in certain areas around the globe, exist in a condition of constant aggression. The theorists would have perceived the concept of global integration as interfering with the independence of various independent countries (Morris, 2003). This is because there are currently some countries which have domination over others in terms of trade through their constant aggressions. The theorists also assume that the member countries are only able to establish relations with other countries on their own and without any interventions from other superior bodies. Currently, the global integration processes is being instigated and led by trading blocks, which include organizations such as OPEC, African and the European Union (Munck, 2005). They believe that when the countries are pursuing the issue of national security, they tend to strive to maximize their amounts of resources. The theorists would disagree with the concept of global integration since it does not foster primarily focus on the attainment of national security for a participating nation. In the realist situation, the countries interacting seem to distrust each other and cannot maintain alliances for long periods of time. Each of the countries participating in the trade depends on its overriding national interests for survival (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). The relations that exist between the members interacting are determined by their military and their economic capabilities. The theorists also believe that the interruption of the issues of morality and values in the international relations usually brings forth hasty commitments, a lot of diplomatic inflexibility and results in war. In addition, they believe that independent states are the main actors within the international systems while special thought is given to the countries that yield higher power since they have more influence on the global stage (Morris, 2003). Global institutions, Multinational corporations and nongovernmental organizations are perceived as having an insignificant influence on issues affecting the global stage. This goes against the concept of global integration since the former institutions play a major role though the players are the independent nations. In the process of global integration all countries are treated as equal with no countries having an advantage over the others (Munck, 2005). The process of global integration has enabled changes in the morals and beliefs of the locals within a society due to the introduction of new foreign cultures. The proponents of the theory would have failed in taking advantage of the benefits of the globalization process. The benefits that accrue from the process of global integration include the reduction in activity times and the development periods of various projects. This is because they will not be able to take advantage of the advancements in the technology and methodologies of carrying out certain processes that come with global integration. Countries that have allowed the benefits of global integration into their economies do enjoy more empowerment on their people, improved communication, reduced transportation times and tremendous improvements in their workers job satisfaction (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). This is because they believe their countries should only adopt what their regimes consider to be vital and not necessarily what is appropriate in a given situation. People offering quality labor would also not be able to shift to countries which are unstable due to war thus implying that the countries will lose in terms of their foreign reserve earnings (Munck, 2005). A philosopher referred to as John Gray, recognized the commonalities in liberal thinking as the acts of being egalitarian, individualistic, meliorist and being Universalist. In being individualistic he professes that individual needs ethically come before the pressures heaped on an individual by the society’s needs. The element of egalitarianism on the other hand assigned the same ethical value and status to every individual in the society. The Meliorist elements claim that the future generations can always improve on their political and communal arrangements. Finally, he declared that the universal elements were responsible for the unification of all human beings while they reduced the differences that existed between the different cultures across the globe (Morris, 2003). The process of global integration facilitates better decision making procedures because it utilizes different types of expertise from different cultures within a society (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). The realists will therefore not be able to reap these benefits due to the constraints they impose on other nations in expressing their sovereignty when dealing with them. Liberals across the globe advocate for the right of owning private property, individual liberties and the equality of all people. Liberalist movements such as the feminism, which advocates for increased awareness of the female rights, have come up in the course of time. During the earlier times, the liberals helped in promoting the concepts of economic individualism and the expansion of constitutional governments and the handing over of authority to parliament (Rawls, 2005). The liberal movements have succeeded in eliminating the absolutist laws with the written pieces of legislation governing the process of making decisions. They have in turn enabled the establishment, expansion and promotions of many free markets across the globe. In achieving the free markets, the liberals destroyed the older economic structures that were in use across the globe by ending the restraints they imposed on the economy. They also had to abolish the global barriers to their trade activities which included guilds and local tariffs that were being charged (Munck, 2005). The system has similarities to the global integration process which creates free markets with minimum barriers and enables the free movement of goods and services across the globe (Rawls, 2005). The liberals across the world have greatly emphasized on the elimination of barriers to the peoples civil rights by their advocacy for equality among the different races and genders. Currently, global liberalism has additionally facilitated the growth and the expansion of many worldwide institutions such as the United Nations. The critics of the concept of liberalism have claimed that the international dependencies being witnessed will result in the loss of an individual nation’s sovereignty (Munck, 2005). They also argue that the issue of democracy presents a fraudulent order that would be incapable of maintaining domestic or international governance. On the other hand, the supporters of liberalism have declared that their concept is the only understandable and promising vision for the global affairs. Many of the richest and tremendously powerful nations around the globe follow the liberal concepts (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). Liberals such as Adam Smith and Richard Cobden have previously presented the arguments that the free exchange of goods and services fosters peace around the globe. This they say goes a long way in eliminating the instances of warring countries across the world (Rawls, 2005). Classical liberals believed in the government being the enemy of freedom whereas the modern liberals greatly fear the accumulation of property and the expansion of power. The proponents of the theory would term the process of global integration as appropriate to their objectives. This is because through the equal treatment of all genders and races more people will tend to come into their society in search of better job opportunities. This will further enable their economies to utilize their expertise in the making of better decisions that will in turn benefit the society as a whole (Munck, 2005). In other words, the process of global integration will enable the countries practicing liberalism in the achievement of efficiency in their operations and the involved costs. The liberalists will also tend to approve of the globalization process that allows for individual or corporate ownership of assets across international borders (Rawls, 2005). This will enable countries that have enough resources to obtain assets in other countries and this will increase their foreign exchange earnings. The construction of transport systems linking different trading states through rail, road and air will additionally help the liberal countries in reducing their transport costs when moving from place to place. There will be lower quantities of communication and an improvement in their quality through the global integration process (Rawls, 2005). Due to the free movement of goods and people and the technological advances being shared between trading countries, there will result fewer meetings and tremendous improvements on the completion periods of various projects. Consumer satisfaction will also be increased since the customers will now be able to obtain a variety of goods and services from beyond their borders to aid in solving their problems (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). The equalities in the ownership of property by different countries and people in the process of global integration will further ensure that wealth is fairly distributed among nations and societies. It will further go a long way in helping to reduce the poverty levels across many countries (Munck, 2005) In the Marxian system, the basis for development in other sectors within a society mainly depends on the economic organization of the society. The relations existing between the political, legal and communal systems form the economic base for those practicing its policies. These relations are currently being hampered by the current technological advances that are being witnessed in the globe integration that is taking place (Munck, 2005). The communal organizations in turn end up becoming inefficient while stifling any future progress of the system (Wosley, 2002). The resulting inefficiencies are thereby claimed to bring forth classes that define an individual’s status within the society. The different classes of people in the system are the individuals who own the factors of creation and those who perform the actual activities of creating the goods and services. This implies that the ideas of social change become a struggle between the two different classes of people within the society. The Marxist system therefore claims that under capitalism, the workers will eventually oppose its harsh policies eventually leading to revolutions (Hoekman & Javorcik, 2006). According to the theories adopted in this system, capitalism cannot sustain the lives of the people living in their society. This is facilitated by its inability of compensating the workers for the decline in profits, reductions in their communal benefits and their pursuit of military aggressions. The system advocates for the communal ownership of different means of producing different goods and services. It aims mainly at satisfying the people wants but not the generation of profits. The proponents of the theory of Marxism claimed that the workers revolutions would eventually call for the adoption of their system. This would be done so as to solve the problem of the previously established classes of people (Wosley, 2002). Marxism greatly advocates for the formation of a classless and stateless system that has its basis on communal ownership of property and free accessibility to resources useful in the production process. The concept also emphasizes that individuals should be given complete freedom for the purpose of developing their own talents and capacities (Wosley, 2002). Democrats around the globe have however rejected the idea of Marxism being achieved through reducing the conflicts that exist between different classes of people and a workers revolution (Munck, 2005). They additionally criticize the concepts of Marxism claiming that it only helps in the inefficient allocation of resources. Marxism emphasizes on the concept of the authorities controlling all production factors thereby implying that the proponents of the theory will greatly be against the issue of global integration. The theorists also propose that the success of the system depends on the relations between different bodies within it (Wosley, 2002). This implies that the countries practicing Marxism will only trade with countries that have similar systems. The global integration process on the other hand advocates for the free trade among the participating countries which would further allow for the free movement of labor. This free movement will further assist the workers in achieving greater satisfaction in their jobs and an increase in satisfaction for their wants and needs. The global integration process further allows for improvements in the process of delegating duties while leading to an increase in the empowerment of the people (Munck, 2005). This in contrast to the policies of Marxism, which stipulate that resources are owned by the states and the individuals have free access to these resources (Wosley, 2002). The global integration process instead facilitates the ownership of property by individuals across their nation’s borders. The proponents of the Marxist theories would therefore be against the concept of global integration since it enables rich countries to exploit poorer countries for their own benefit. This results in the establishment of classes of people within the society which is greatly against the doctrines of Marxism. References Charles, H. M. & King, J. E. (2004). The Political Economy of Marx. New York: NYU Press. Hoekman, B. M. & Javorcik, B. K. S. (2006). Global Integration and Technology Transfer, New York: World Bank Publications. Gilpin, R. (2001). Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Morris, P. (2003). Realism. New York: Routledge. Munck, R. (2005). Globalization and Social Exclusion. Washington: Kumarian Press. Rawls, J. (2005). Political Liberalism. Washington: Columbia University Press. Ravenhill, J. (2008). Global Political Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Smith, J. S. (2006). Building New Deal Liberalism: The Political Economy Of Public Works. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wosley, P. (2002). Marx and Marxism. New York: Routledge. Read More