What is the relationship between the state, the economy and power Essay Sample

following its regulations, discouraging the pursuit of individual national interests and weakening state sovereignty. Scholars such as Rosecrance, who supported broad institutionalism, believed that the growing interdependence of economies had diminished the importance of territorial conquest for nations.

In the modern world, the advantages of trade and collaboration between provinces surpass the benefits of military competition and territorial control. Historically, provinces viewed acquiring territories and land as the means to enhance national wealth. However, provinces have now shifted from being primarily focused on military power to prioritizing trade. Statesmen have realized that accumulating national wealth and promoting development heavily relies on macro-economic policies that improve their economy's competitiveness compared to other provinces, leading to higher levels of efficiency.

Multinational corporations are motivated to invest in a specific country due to engineering-intensive production methods and valuable human capital. Neo-liberals argue that commercial relationships between corporations and individuals have diminished the power of the state. The ongoing war in Iraq has raised speculation about the role of oil, but there is no doubt about its global repercussions. Britain and America have somewhat isolated themselves from Europe and other allies.
Currently, states face potential economic consequences from other members of the international community, making them less able to act assertively due to economic interdependence. The success of individual states now depends on the overall success of the global economy. Liberals firmly believe that embracing a free market is crucial for economies to thrive.

The minimum intervention by provinces is crucial in a democratic nation-state where the province is accountable. It is also important to have proper checks and balances to prevent potential abuse by the state. Liberals are cautious of

concentrated forms of power, especially that of the state. In the 19th and 20th centuries, liberal scholars studying the international system observed that governing elites used their power for their own benefit rather than considering the well-being of the masses. This approach to diplomacy disregarded shared human interests and the legitimate claims of smaller states seeking self-determination. Instead, it resulted from collusion among elites who shaped international relations to serve their own powerful interests. These elites advocated for foreign policy formulation by professional diplomats free from national political influences.

Therefore, advancing the democratization of domestic political relations (popular engagement) is seen as the way forward in transforming foreign policy. Progressives envision a peaceful global world order in which all societies are democratic, civil rights are protected, and markets thrive. Now, I will shift my focus to providing a realistic account of the relationship between the economy.

The province and power. Realism prevailed in the post-Second World War period as a pessimistic position of universe political relations; they argued that their positions were more realistic than the dreamer and Utopian beliefs of the progressives. E. H. Carr believed that it was unsafe to base the study of international political relations on an fanciful desire of how we would like the universe to be. Utopian influence on government policy towards peace and disarming can lead to it being vulnerable to foreign onslaught.

Liberals were neglecting the principle of power in their effort to eliminate the start of war. According to Carr, the post-war Utopia was being used by the 'satisfied powers' or provinces with vested interests to maintain their current position in world politics. The philosophy of the harmony of

interests is invoked by privileged groups as a moral device to justify and preserve their dominant position.

Morgenthau, during the Han dynasties, held the belief that the task was to replace political thought with the Enlightenment tradition within the minds. This would lead to the concealment of power and the establishment of an artificial standard for politics in science. Consequently, the weakening of political awareness resulted in an inadequate form of theory, which further led to the substitution of scientific standards for political evaluations and ultimately destroyed the ability to make informed political decisions.

"For Morgenthau, the belief that scientific truth could be applied to politics was mistaken. Politics is a realm of power, not truth. Realism argues that states are the main actors in international relations, and therefore studying international relations means studying states and their interactions."

According to realists, provinces claim to have a legitimate monopoly on the usage of force, which they believe is essential for maintaining stability. Realists and progressives both agree that inter-state behavior occurs in an environment where lawlessness and uncontrolled behavior are prevalent. However, they differ in their views on how international laws and organizations can promote stability and order. Realists believe that understanding and pursuing power is crucial for understanding state behavior and motivation. In the traditional sense, realism asserts that military capability is the essence of power.

Having muscular power is crucial as it allows one to be self-sufficient and serves as a deterrent to foreign attacks. It not only ensures safety but also allows a nation to engage in foreign affairs when needed. Realists consider it as the ultimate authority in resolving international conflicts.

"Realism acknowledges that a state's military

strength is affected by multiple factors, including resources, population size, and territory. However, it also recognizes that relying solely on armed forces may not accurately reflect a state's power and can be misleading. Other important elements such as military efficiency, morale, preparedness, and leadership greatly impact the extent of a state's power. The concept of power itself is heavily debated. For example, insurgents in Iraq have effectively utilized media power and influence to advance their goals."

Both Tony Blair and George Bush, as leaders, have frequently been compelled to give public speeches in direct response to media reports provoked by insurgents. In Saudi Arabia, the oil industry has experienced repeated acts of terrorist sabotage, resulting in the increase in oil prices after each attack.

The power of provinces to discourage threats from others has changed significantly due to the creation of the atomic bomb. This new weapon allows states to ensure their security without constantly worrying about their position in economic competition among great powers. According to Michael Mastanduno, the prominence of nuclear capabilities in US defense strategy during the Cold War has resulted in a less direct connection between economic and military power.

The United States and the Soviet Union refrained from direct combat to avoid triggering a nuclear disaster. Neo-realism emerged as a response to new developments in global politics and the rise of neo-liberalism. Neo-liberals perceive globalization as proof of a significant shift towards a world without borders and increased interdependence in the international system. Initially challenging realist thinking, neo-realists eventually addressed these concerns by arguing that globalization has been exaggerated in various ways. They assert that it is not a global phenomenon but rather

confined to Western nations. Stephen Krasner further asserts that third world states are far from attaining full "globalization".

In many regions of Africa, feudalism and peasant agriculture are widespread, giving rise to a societal structure that revolves around this system. Rather than large-scale industrial farms, subsistence agriculture takes center stage as the primary form of farming. Conversely, developed states boast economically efficient farms.

In the third universe, authorities have an autocratic viewpoint and believe they are not benefiting from globalization. They perceive globalization as exclusive to the Western world. Neo-realists recognize that advancements in information technology have globalized international financial markets, but they also argue that international trade was equally important in the 1900s. Furthermore, neo-realists state that economic activity is not as globally interconnected as progressives claim.

Both the US economy and European countries, along with trans-national corporations, prioritize their domestic markets. Approximately 90% of the US economy is dedicated to producing goods and services for Americans rather than for exportation. Similarly, European countries also concentrate on their own markets. However, despite manufacturing and selling products in various nations, these corporations usually have headquarters located in a single country.

The primary location for direction and ownership is chiefly at place. Third neo-realists emphasize that military power is still more important in shaping international relations than economic globalization. They argue that the differences in capabilities between states, rather than economic forces operating across or beyond states, explain the most significant events in international politics. Additionally, neo-realists criticize progressives for overlooking or neglecting the essential political, social, and economic functions performed by states.

According to some, there is no other administration that surpasses the crowned head with fixed boundary lines in

terms of maintaining peace internally and promoting wellbeing. The nation-state is considered to be the only form of political community and has the exclusive authority to bind the entire community to international law. However, neo-realists like Waltz argue that this perspective overlooks the limitations imposed by the lawless nature of the international system.

Instead of relying on human nature to explain inter-state behavior, Waltz believed that international relations should be treated as a separate sphere that shapes and influences the way states behave. Waltz emphasized the need to study how structural conditions within the international system impact the outcomes of interactions between states. Michael Mastanduno focused on how changes in the international system impact the development and implementation of US foreign policy. "Different international structures offer different incentives for integration or separation [of security and economic policy]. A multi-polar world politics creates incentives for integration - great powers are inclined towards economic interdependence."

They heavily depend on Allies for their security and the risk of Allies abandoning them is significant. Economics plays a crucial role in international diplomacy. However, bipolar world politics promotes the separation of economics and security.

Bipolar great powers have a tendency to have economic autonomy and rely less on allies. The risk of allies abandoning more stable confederation structures is relatively low. Additionally, it is argued that unipolarity encourages the dominant state to integrate economic and security policies in order to maintain its privileged position.

The text implies that a country's focus on its economic scheme often takes precedence over its national security scheme in dealing with potential rivals. However, critics argue that Waltz, the author, overlooks how states can impact the international system by

altering their internal temperaments. Susan Strange distinguishes between relational power and structural power. Relational power pertains to one entity's capacity to influence another entity into doing something they wouldn't have done otherwise. Conversely, structural power refers to the ability to shape and decide the structures of the global political economy within which other states and their political institutions function.

Waltz insists that mutual cooperation cannot pose a threat to the lawless nature of economic enterprises. However, over the past few decades, there has been an increase in collaboration and a shift towards an international order. In contrast, structural realists like Buzan argue that the restraints of the international system have actually conditioned states to address the inherent anarchy within it. Vincent Sica further argues that money laundering compels states to cooperate.

The international fiscal system encompasses various factors that can rapidly devalue a nation's currency, including the combination of 24-hour markets, instant execution of cross-border transactions, and significant capital movements.

It is crucial for the state to regulate this system, but it is difficult to oversee all activity within the domestic economy. Therefore, it is necessary for provinces to collaborate, not only in the international financial system but also in tracking down potential threats to national security due to the increased movement of terrorists worldwide.

After the terrorist attacks of September 2001, provinces have adopted a more organized approach in tracking down terrorist cells. Now I will make my decision based on my findings and positions regarding the topic at hand. International relations scholarship has undergone several changes over the past century.

The attention given to international politics has increased, resulting in the development of different theories and perspectives. These

theories not only focus on the nature of interactions and relationships among economies, states, and power, but also on the extent of change that has occurred and how it will continue to change in the future. The question of whether globalization is an inevitable and irreversible process, similar to the industrial revolution, or a mere imagination, remains to be seen. It is clear that there is a need to understand the interaction between economies and politics at both domestic and global levels.

However, attempting to comprehend these separate societal scientific disciplines is challenging and varied. The complexity of the international sphere introduces various approaches to analyzing it. For instance, what role does civilization, faith, or language play in the relationships between nation-states, their peoples, and power? It is important to acknowledge that globalization is not solely driven by economic and political factors. It would be unfair to criticize progressives for their excessive optimism. Political theory often fuels the belief that there is a gap between the ideal and the reality of how things should be.

'What is' and 'how to acquire there' have not truly narrowed over time. It is filled with empty promises and unrealized expectations. However, taking a realist perspective does provide us with a realistic view of history, although it is disheartening, to say the least. Perhaps the reason why progressives presented such a utopian and idealist history was not only to prevent war and explain the international system as it was but also to inspire, energize, and motivate people towards a more peaceful solution.

Possibly, in its historical context, it was necessary and inevitable that people wished to remain optimistic and have faith, despite

its unlikelihood, that they could live without fear and hardship. By presenting leaders with such optimistic expectations, it could have possibly made achieving peace more possible, as they would feel pressured to not fail.