Four Girls and a Guy

Welcome to our blog for our University College World Politics class!!!

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Realism vs. liberalism

This is another very difficult question posed to us by Professor Jackson. I personaly think that both the realists and the liberals have it right in their own way. Realists believe that military force will always be a central part of world politics while liberals believe that negotiations will resolve the conflict instead of force. The liberal belief is certainly the most desired belief in a perfect world. However I also think that this world will never be perfect so there will always need to be at least a threat of military retaliation in order for peace to have a chance. I'm in no way pro-war. I just think that some countries respond to military threat better than if there is only peace talks. In talks I feel that the stronger power controls the negotiations and the weaker power tends to get the worse end of the deal, in most cases. I would prefer peace talks to military conflict but I don't think that only peace talks would be very wise in this world. I think that a combination of the liberal and realist view is what is right. I think that a country should have a working army but if there is a problem, they should try to settle it through talks instead of through military force. Darcy's post about the Cold War was right on. I couldn't agree more.


Blogger EmilyM said...

I also agree with you in that a combination is the best way. You can't use the liberal theory against all groups, just like it is best with some.

1:59 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home