Global Political Economy a Marxist Critique - Personal Statement Example

Introduction: Muldoon de that we live in a world that is characterized by constant global issues and crises. For instance, the global climatic change is an issue that threatens the living conditions of mankind, and the future inhabitants of earth. Another example is the 2008 global financial crisis, which almost led to the collapse of the world economy. The war on terror, which has been declared after the September 11th 2001 attack, has also taken a global perspective. However, there is no consensus by world governments on how this war will be won, and when it will be over, and won. Because of the evolution and the emergence of these challenges, it is difficult for the citizens of various nations to trust their policy makers, based on competency and impartiality. Muldoon (2011) further go on to denote that the global institutions and organizations that have been formed to handle these challenges are unable to effectively handle these problems, and address the various challenges that face the global community. It is also important to understand that global institutions are limited in solving these global issues because they normally lack democratic legitimacy that can help them garner enough support, to solve the issues under consideration. On the other hand, Rittberger (2001) denote that national governments and institutions are limited in solving these global issues because of the emergence of globalization. On this basis, there is always a need of collaboration between non-state actors and state actors in solving problems that are global in nature. This therefore brings us to a concept referred to as world politics, whereby there is a interaction between non state actors, and state actors on the international arena. This paper seeks to answer the question as to why liberalism is the best theoretical framework that explains the concept of globalization. In achieving its objectives, this paper will analyze various competing theoretical frameworks such as realism and Marxism, and give reasons as to why they are not suited to explain the concept of global governance (Stubbs and Underhill, 2006). Thereafter this paper will explain the concept of liberalism, its main tenets, and how it support global governance. Finally this paper will contain a conclusion, which is a summary of the main points addressed in this paper. Liberalism and Global Governance: Muldoon (2011) denote that the best ideological framework that supports interaction at the global level is liberalism. However, Rittberger (2001) denote that people differ on how they understand the concepts of liberalism. In the perspective of Muldoon (2011), liberalism is associated with an economic ideology that is predominantly practiced in Europe, and advocates for a free market economy. On the other hand, Stubbs and Underhill (2006) denotes that liberalism is a political principle that strongly advocates for democratic states, and political, social, and economic freedom of individuals. It is important to understand that in all these two definitions, there is a consensus on the aspect of an individual’s self-determination, liberty, and equality. These concepts are regarded as universal, and rational, and they are aimed at promoting human rights, democratic tendencies, respect to the rule of law, and tolerance to other institutions that consist of the society. Muldoon (2011) define global governance as a social movement that is geared towards the political integration of transnational actors. On this basis, scholars denote that the main aim of global governance is to solve the various global issues and problems that affect more than one country or region of the world. It is important to understand that global governance comes as a result of globalization. Globalization refers to the interdependence between states, and non states actors on the international arena. This interdependence has been made possible because of the emergence of technology, in communication, transport, and other areas that affect the lives of mankind. Other theories of IR and why they cannot explain the concept of Global Governance: Realism: Realism is one theory that can be used to explain the interactions at the global perspective. In the perspective of realism, states are the sole actors in the international system, which is anarchic in nature. Rittberger (2001) denote that one of the major tenets of realism is that there is no authority in the international system that has the capability of regulating the affairs of the actors operating in the international system that is the states. Scholte (2011) further denote that at the international system, sovereign states are the main actors, and there is no place for multi-national companies, non-governmental organizations, and inter-governmental organizations to play a role in the world affairs. Based on these facts, Scholte (2011) denote that nation states are always in competition with one another, for the main purpose of protecting their sovereignty, and ensuring their survival. Stubbs and Underhill (2006) further denote that in an attempt to protect their sovereignty, and ensure their survival, nation states will always try to amass resources. For instance, in the perspective of Iran, advocates of realism would argue that Iran intends to develop nuclear weapons for purposes of protecting itself from United States and Israel. On this basis, the nuclear programs initiated by Iran are aimed at ensuring the survival of the country, and of the regime of the Ayatollahs. According to this theory, the relationship between states in the international sphere is determined by the power that these states hold. This power is measured in terms of the states military might, economic capability, and social and political influence. The proponents of this theory argue that the permanent members of the Security Council is a prove that relationship in the international arena is based on the amount of power that a state holds in the international system (Stubbs and Underhill, 2006). The Permanent members of the Security Council consist of UK, USA, China, France and Russia, and these states are considered to be powerful in terms of military, political, and economic influence. Based on these tenets of realism, it is important to understand that this ideology does not support the concept of global governance. This is because global governance believes in other actors such as multi-national companies, nongovernmental organizations, inter-governmental organizations, as well as states, as actors in the international arena. This is a concept that realism strongly disagrees, and this is because realism only recognizes states as actors in the international arena (Pease, 2008). Marxism: Pease (2008) denote that Marxism is a theoretical framework that rejects the tenets and principles set forth by realism. According to this theoretical framework, the relationship of states in the global perspective is shaped by economic interests, and other material aspects. On this basis, Marxism focuses on the study of class system, brought about by economic development and inequalities. Scholars denote that Marxism views the international system as a united that is integrated for purposes of pursuing the capitalistic tendencies, which involves accumulation of capital, and material resources. On this basis, scholar confirms that relations at the international system occur purely for economic gains. This explains the reasons as to why there was the emergence of colonialism. In the perspective of Marxism, colonialism occurred for the main purpose of depleting the resources of colonies, to satisfy the economic needs of their colonizers. Muldoon (2011) gives an example of the Belgium colony in Africa, referred to as Congo. In this colony, King Leopold is accused of exploiting the resources of Congo, for his personal benefit. These resources include mineral resources, wood products, and ivory. In the perspective of Marxism therefore, the main intention of colonialism was to look for resources that could help colonizers to spur up their industries. It is important to understand that colonialism came up during the period of industrialization, where industries required raw materials and products for purposes of running them. Marxism also lays emphasis on the interaction of states in the international system based on their economic ability (Scholte, 2011). On this basis, states are classified as either first world countries, second world countries, or third world countries. Scholar denotes that this classification occurs based on the economic development of the states under consideration. First world countries are the most developed, while third world countries are still developing. On this basis, the manner in which third world countries interact with first world countries is different from the manner in which first world countries interact amongst themselves. First world countries will always try to impose their will on third world countries for their own benefit. Scholar denotes that an example of this situation is the imposement of structural adjustments policies by the World Bank and IMF in the 1980s, and early 1990s to third world countries (Muldoon, 2011). These policies were aimed at opening up the economy of these countries, to foreign investments. Lee (2007) denote that Marxism theoretical framework cannot be effectively used to explain this aspect of global governance. This is because it focuses mainly on economic interests, and refuses to look at other areas of cooperation, such as cooperation in maintaining global security, fighting poverty, improving the health standards of people, and maintaining food security. Lee (2007) further denote that interaction at the international system is not just about economics, as there are other institutions in place that are charged with addressing issues that affect mankind other than economic. Examples of these institutions include, people, World Health Organization (WHO) which is responsible for improving the health standards of people, the International Court of Justice, which is responsible for settling disputes amongst states, and offering advisories to states that are members to the UN, and units established by the UN. Scholar denotes that global governance involves addressing issues such as insecurity, health, terrorism, environmental changes, as well as economic issues. On this basis, realism cannot explain this concept of global governance, and this is because it only focuses of economic gains and issues. Liberalism and why it better explains the concept of global governance: Based on the limitations of Marxism and Realism, scholars denote that Liberalism is the best theory that can help us understand the concept of global governance. It is important to understand that governance refers to ways and methods in which an institution, business organization, and a government manage their day to day affairs. Hurrell (2007) denotes that during the act of governing, there must be laws and applications that guide administrators, and this includes norms, ethical standards, and customs. It is therefore important to understand that good governance involves how well the affairs of the institution under consideration are managed. In the perspective of Hurrell (2007), global governance involves the manner in which global issues such as poverty, unemployment; climatic changes, insecurity, diseases, etc are managed. It is important to understand that a global government does not exist, and on this basis, it is the actors at the international system that are involved in this aspect of global governance. This includes multi-national organization, state governments, inter-government organizations, and non-governmental institutions. Scholar denotes that a single institution is always given the leading role in governing the issues that affect the world population. For instance, World Trade Organization is tasked with the responsibility of leading other leading other international actors on issues dealing with trade affairs, and the World Health Organization is tasked with leading other actors on issues dealing health. Scholars denote that because of these characteristics of global governance, then the best theoretical framework that can explain global governance is liberalism. It is important to understand that liberalism is a theoretical framework that is built on the ideas of liberty and equity. On a general note, Franceschet (2009) denotes that liberalism is built on the ideas of civil rights, free and fair elections, freedom of religion, press and trade. Based on these facts, it is important to understand that global governance aims at promoting the basic human rights of individuals, and this includes religion, trade, participation in the political process, etc. Take for instance an institution such as the International Criminal Court of Justice that is based in Hague, the Netherlands. The aim of this court is to protect the vulnerable people from various injustices and an abuse of their rights by their leaders and influential personalities. This court is basically concerned with people who have committed crimes against humanity. For instance, the court successfully convicted Charles Taylor, former president of Liberia, on crimes against humanity, and jailed him for over 40 years in prison. The International Criminal Court of Justice is a tool of global governance, and it aims at promoting peace and stability in the international arena. Dunn (2009) further denote that liberalism advocates for the development of institutions in the international arena, for purposes of solving the various problems that affect the society. On this basis, liberalism recognizes that states are not the only actors in the international arena, but there are other actors such as multinational organizations, inter-governmental organizations, and non-governmental organizations. For instance, liberalism advocates for the formation of the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the World Trade Organizations, and other non state actors in the international arena. In the perspective of liberalism, these institutions play a great role in promoting peace, security, health, and good governance in the various countries in the world. For instance, the United Nations is responsible for creating stability in various countries of the world, such as the Congo, where it has the largest peace keeping force. Institutions such as NATO played a great role in creating political stability in Yugoslavia, during the regime of Milosevic. Organizations such as the Bill and Melissa Gates foundation play an important role in addressing global challenges and issues such as extreme poverty, climatic changes, poor education, and health issues. This foundation by Bill and Mellissa Gate identifies projects that need to be funded, based on the issues outlined. This is one major characteristic of global governance, whereby effective governance of global issues relies mostly on institutions formed in the international arena. Cabrera (2011) denote that liberalism has a variety of weaknesses, in addressing issues that face the global community. For instance, Scholars denote that the institutions formed by the international community to address challenges that face the global community are always accused of breaching on the sovereignty of independent states. Take for example the World Bank and IMF which are accused of interfering with the sovereignty of third world countries by insisting on the adoption of structural adjustment polices, in exchange of economic aid. Other example includes NATO and the United Nations when they authorized a no-go fly zone, in the Libyan civil war in the year 2011. However, scholars denote that the structural adjustment polices were aimed at developing the economies of third world countries, and NATOs intervention in Libya was an example of humanitarian intervention, aimed at protecting the citizens of Libya, from the military activities of President Gaddafi. On this basis, scholars argue that whenever global institutions interfere with the sovereignty of a state, the main reason is to protect citizens of that state form the excesses of the regime in power. Conclusion: In conclusion, it is impossible to talk about global governance without talking about liberalism. This is because the principles of global governance are developed from the philosophies contained under liberalism. As noted in this paper, liberalism advocates for democratic governance, freedom and rights of individuals, and equality of humanity. To effectively reach a situation where these issues raised by liberalism are witnessed across the globe, there is a need of establishing institutions that would help in implementing the provisions and philosophies of liberalism, hence the development of global governance. Theories such as Marxism and Realism cannot explain the concept of global governance because they are limited on issues that they address. For instance, Marxism is limited of economics and financial gain, where as realism is limited to states as the only actors in the international arena. Bibliography: Cabrera, L. G. (2011). Global governance, global government institutional visions for an evolving world system. Albany: State University of New York Press. Dunn, B. (2009). Global political economy a Marxist critique. London: Pluto Press. Franceschet, A. (2009). The ethics of global governance. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Hurrell, A. (2007). On global order power, values, and the constitution of international society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lee, S. (2007). Neo-liberalism, state power and global governance. Dordrecht: Springer. Muldoon, J. P. (2011). The new dynamics of multilateralism diplomacy, international organizations, and global governance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Pease, K. (2008). International organizations perspectives on governance in the twenty-first century (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall. Rittberger, V. (2001). Global governance and the United Nations system. Tokyo: United Nations University Press. Scholte, J. A. (2011). Building global democracy?: civil society and accountable global governance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Stubbs, R., & Underhill, G. R. (2006). Political economy and the changing global order (3rd ed.). Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press. Read More