Neoliberalism in international relations was developed as an alternative to neorealism and its fatalistic and conflict centric view. In short, neoliberals believe that sustainable cooperation between states is possible when close interaction through an international community increases interdependence and shared values while international organizations help to transcend the collective action problem. Unsurprisingly this general optimism is shared widely within r/neoliberal, but it is almost always misunderstood. Neoliberalism doesn’t mean that the use of force is never warranted or necessary. And it is antagonal to a foreign policy based on protectionism and “core national interest”.
There are a few core assumptions neoliberals and neoconservatives share on international relations. Both assume that the core actors are states, that the system they interact in is naturally anarchic and that states act primarily in self interest. The difference is that neoliberals allow for a more nuanced definition of self-interests and account for the possibility to transcend anarchy through institutions.
Self-interest for neoliberals is not limited to maximizing “power” in a zero sum game. It also accounts for other factors such as economic prosperity and shared values to influence state behavior. Increasing economic interdependence and shared values can be made transparent, facilitated and enforced by international organizations. This leads to a reduction of open conflicts, at least between states sharing fundamental belief systems.
This last point seems to be the source of most misunderstandings. “Rogue states” (defined as those not participating in or undermining the liberal world order) which act in bad faith are a systemic threat and cannot be deterred by statements of grave concerns or economic sanctions. The liberal world order has to be defended - if necessary with brute force.
Today rogue states find open support from emerging super powers like China and re-emerging regional powers like Russia. They are building an illiberal alternative of international collaboration with pressure on many countries to join. These spheres of influence are becoming increasingly mutually exclusive with states like the Philippines trapped in the middle.
I’m this conflict many self-declared “doves” argue for “diplomatic solutions” and “diplomatic and economic pressure”. That’s not wrong but incomplete. Every “diplomatic solution” is based on leverage and the potential use of f
... keep reading on reddit ➡International Relations Neoliberalism
In the academic field of International relations, neoliberalism refers to a school most closely associated with Harvard and Princeton. The neoliberal school of IR arose in the 1970s as a response to the hegemony of the "realism" school. In IR, "liberalism" refers to the orientation of Woodrow Wilson and other people who hoped to reshape the world, through the use of war and international organizations. The goal of the early liberals was democratization and an end to war. Neoliberals took these same goals, but rejected the unscientific applications that had come before. Instead, neoliberals decided to apply rigorous mathematical and scientific techniques. Most neoliberal analyses relied heavily on rational choice and game theoretic models, borrowed extensively from economics. (The main thing tying both domestic neoliberalism and international neoliberalism is the heavy reliance on economics.) Neoliberals today believe that tying states together in institutions, it can decrease the signal noise that prevents communication between them. Moreover, it can increase the costs associated with provocation and aggression. The best formulation of neoliberal hopes can be found in the "democratic peace" theory. According to this, no two mature democracies have ever fought a war against each other. Therefore, promoting liberal democracy around the world will have the side-effect of decreasing war. Moreover, since a vibrant middle class has long been recognized as a necessary condition for liberal democracy, neoliberals have focused on helping nations choose policies that would promote the creation of middle classes and democracy. Criticism of neoliberalism often comes from both the right and the left. Realists often claim that because neoliberals ignore power, they are fooling themselves as to what really causes war and struggle. This is despite the fact that neoliberal claims and predictions have come true at least as often as those made by realists. From the left, constructivists claim that neoliberals are ignoring the structure behind the norms they espouse. Moreover, they point to China as an example of a country that can follow the economic advice of the neoliberals without democratizing. Prominent neoliberals in IR include Bill Clinton and Thomas Friedman.
This paper will adopt a Marxian political economy approach and place neoliberalism as one of the phases in capitalism.
It is well established that the fight for socialism is not a fight that can happen alone in one nation, as the influence of capital shall still be felt greatly in a socialist state coexisting with capitalist states and neoliberal international agreements.
People Before Profit's international policy can be summed down into 3 basic tenants:
-
The promotion of socialism worldwide
-
The destruction of capitalist institutions worldwide
-
The abolishment of oppressive structures worldwide
For our first tenant, PBP firmly believes that upon the establishment of socialism, whether it be in the Republic of Ireland or while in the United Kingdom, that the state should put resources towards funding groups dedicated to establishing socialist states worldwide.
In addition, the PBP supports a new economic and military union for socialist states, to help promote trade and unity between socialist states, and to help defend ourselves from threats from the capitalist powers.
Onto our second tenant, PBP has many institutions it seeks to abolish. However, 2 standout as being very influential in Northern Ireland and are our top priority. Those institutions being NATO and the EU. While Northern Ireland is apart of the UK, we shall push to ensure that collaboration with the EU is strictly limited to preserving the Good Friday Agreement, and not participating in other anti worker and neoliberal EU institutions for so called "economic gain." PBP shall also push for an exit from NATO, and for the UK to withdraw from all conflicts spearhead by the USA and NATO for the sole purpose of increasing their wealth.
Should Northern Ireland reunite with the Republic, we will campaign for a full Eirexit, as to ensure we have no institution stopping us from creating a socialist 32 county Republic of Ireland, as well as opposing, ascension to NATO.
And finally onto the third tenant, we shall support the destruction of oppressive structures worldwide by standing strong with the oppressed. We shall stand against China and their abuses against the Uyghur people, the people of Tibet, and the people of Hong Kong. We shall stand with the people of Palestine, and advocate for their independence. And we shall stand with the people of Syria against the murderous Assad regime. These absues have gone on for too long, and it doesn't matter if these nations are capitalist, or these nations parade as so called "socialist states." These nations are committing unbelievable abuses, and must
... keep reading on reddit ➡
I'm also looking at schools in Australia for the same. Which country's universities are better in terms of programs and job opportunities? Are there any other countries that have better programs?
Hi, I’m currently in High School and I been thinking about going into International Relations as a major. Anyone who has any advice and/or what to expect from this degree?
-Thanks!
Wanted to know what kind of job opportunities are available in UK and what universities have the best IR programs. Thanks in advance!
Here are a handful of things Nixon pursued that strike me as likely to cause a backlash among his supporters:
- Proposed the Family Assistance Plan, guaranteeing an income to American families.
- Established the Environmental Protection Agency.
- Administered the desegregation of Southern schools.
- Signed the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), the first comprehensive and detailed nuclear weapons limitation pact between the two superpowers.
- Opened diplomatic relations with China after 20 years of animosity.
- Beginning the process of winding down the Vietnam War
- Set aside a percentage of federal construction jobs for minorities.
- Proposed legislation that creating the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
I realize that some of these issues were not as polarized as they are today, but it seems like every one must have been unpopular among a considerable portion of voters and politicians. They strike me as fairly courageous moves. In reality, did they cause a large amount of backlash?
I know that careers in IT can be very broad and right now I am studying cyber security and want to pursue a career in that, but also have been finding that im interested in careers that work with other countries and organizations across the world like international affairs. Are there any jobs in the cyber security sector that offer things like that? Like working with other countries and would make travel a lot?
I have BA in Int'l Relations and Political Science and I am looking at getting a MA degree with a focus on China/East Asia. I am analytical but not good with numbers or math (home schooled K-12).
I want to get into investing but wondering how viable my degree is or what kind of investing it would be best suited for. I have interests in energy (oil, renewable, natural gas), geopolitics, international trade, conflict, tech, cyber, and crypto and trying to decide how best to leverage these interests to aid in foreign currency exchange market and futures.
Completely new to investing but always wanted to learn more about it. Long term I'm looking at getting a PhD and doing this on the side for now.
Hey everyone,
I'm a junior at a top 25 school right now starting to look at grad schools. The process seems overwhelming but I wanted to see if people think I should aim lower. I'm aiming for Georgetown, American, GWU, Tufts, UChicago, and Johns Hopkins. So all the ones that I probably won't get into lmfaoo. Also if anyone has advice for the GRE please tell me.
GPA: I'll probably graduate with around a 3.65. Kinda low for top programs.
GRE: Haven't taken yet, but will take a practice one soon
Work experience: By the time I graduate, I would have interned at a foreign policy think tank, well-known national security magazine, a Senate Committee, and the State Department. I've also held multiple fellowships.
Recommendations: I think I can get some good ones from people in the industry
Languages: fluent in French
Publications: I've published about foreign policy/national security more than a dozen times in pretty well-known places (I think this is something that stands me out)
Other stuff: Hmm I'm an African immigrant lol. I'll definitely play this up
I'm really sorry if there is a constant flow of posts like these I'm just trying to find some starting point.
Hello guys!
I need help with writing a grad level 2200 word research paper on `Patterns of Change in USA and China Strategies in the South China Sea after the global financial crisis during the period of 2008-2015'. Experience in international affairs is a huge plus! I would need it before the 30th (7 days maximum).
If someone messages me I can send the instructions for the paper! Thank you
Donald Tusk1, the former Prime Minister of Poland and President of the European People’s Party between 2014 and 2019, describes the West as a unique political civilization as if an institution we all agreed to be part of when we decided to be a democracy, to be founded by the same value system and the same principles of liberty, equality, popular sovereignty, separation of powers, checks and balances and individual rights. 2 At least it felt this way after defeating the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, witnessing the fall of the Soviet Union, and after 1951 with the sinning of the Paris Treaty that created the European Coal and Steel Community. There was a permanent shift within international relations and these events became landmarks for the creation of international law based on supranationalism and economic growth. It felt as though we were walking the same path to a “new world order”.
This term has been uttered several times throughout international political history, since the end of the First World War concerning Woodrow Wilson’s vision for the “League of Nations” until now with constant power shifts and new alliances. It means entering a new period of history that brings dramatic changes to the world political order, international relations, and of course, world economics.
It’s clear now that this order didn’t last and we are now faced with a completely different world, but once again this catchphrase resurfaces in the speech of China’s communist leader, Xi Jinping, in Boao Forum for Asia on April 2021, where he called for a new world order. So the question is, is this order rising?
In 2019 the European Union described China as a “systemic rival” – this was and remains a sharp change in the perception of the China-European relationship. It essentially means the European Union considers China a rival in terms of ideas and norms, capable of dividing the countries within this alliance.
Seen as a rival the European Union began to take action. In may 2021 the European Commission announced plans to reduce the dependence on China in strategic economic areas. The same month, the European Parliament froze the ratification of the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment in a joint action with the US, UK, and Canada, the EU imposed sanctions on four
Chinese officials who were believed to be linked to the Uyghur genocide. This led to immediate Chinese counter-sanctions on 4 EU entities and 10 EU officials, 5 of whom are members of the European
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hi all,
I'm applying to several programs in International Relations and wanted to know if some people would look at my current copy?
Thanks!
Is there anyone who is pursuing masters in International Relations at Australian National University? I would like to know about your experience and how competitive was the application process for you? I got in but didn't get any scholarship. I have reapplied. And what level of employment opportunities it opens for international students? Also, I want to take up an exchange semester in Europe. How does that work? Do I need to indicate it before hand or can I apply for an exchange programme once I start studying? Thank you!
For most of my life I've considered myself a leftist. I even worked on senator sanders' campaigns in vt as a kid. I used to be left liberal and in college became more and more leftist.
I never read beyond the first chapter of Capital so most of my exposure to leftist ideas had to do more from the cultural realm, I found Guy Debords work really interesting, and Mark Fishers. I would never claim to understand marxist economics particularly well and I also was never insanely impressed by past socialist societies, but I did feel a strong sense of alienation for a few reasons and felt I could understand the cultural critiques of Spectacle etc better than any economic points.
One of the reasons for this alienation is that I simply didn't feel like I could ever make it in this world. I'd always felt slow, and had some mental disorders like ADHD and OCD that made functioning in school difficult. My family was lower middle class but probably parents were downwardly mobile and highly educated and convinced that the best thing for me to do was go to liberal arts college, despite the debt. I incurred about 25000 in federal loans over three and a half years. I basically had the max amount you could get in financial aid from this expensive liberal arts college due to my family's income but it was still a lot of debt. On meds and with a lot of stressful work and even some self medicating I managed to do well in the art program there, and worked manual labor jobs in the summer to save money. But I literally always had this nagging fear that I would eventually just "not make it" due to my mental disabilities. I thought I could never learn to code, and I really find it insanely hard, except for when medicated sometimes.
On top of that, during my summer job i got a TBI that led to me being really cognitively and physically disabled, and having chronic pain. I had to drop out one semester away from finishing. Now I'm housebound and cant do much of any kind of work. I finally got SSI after years but it's a tiny tiny amount compares to my living expenses. I am essentially useless and a burden to my family.
My ramble was to bring up a couple points and maybe a couple questions too for those who consider themselves neoliberal.
One point : this sub portrays college debtors all as irresponsible basket weavers from upper middle class families and I think it's a little tone deaf. Many of my classmates dont fall into that category and also even my rich
... keep reading on reddit ➡
I know that most most people on this sub support neoliberal economic policy, but how many of you support neoliberal foreign policy? Personally, I consider myself a neoliberal because I support economic liberalization, but I prefer the neorealist approach to foreign policy to the neoliberal one. Which school of thought in international relations theory is your favorite and why?
I know that careers in IT can be very broad and right now I am studying cyber security and want to pursue a career in that, but also have been finding that im interested in careers that work with other countries and organizations across the world like international affairs. Are there any jobs in the cyber security sector that offer things like that? Like working with other countries and would make travel a lot?
