PO107 (5)

amarjotsidhu's version from 2015-06-07 17:01


Question Answer
Liberal emphasis on individualityindividuals = of highest value and are rational = use this to shape their own lives; society should allow rational individuals to flourish
Vincent on the demise of liberal parties demise of liberal parties in Britain and other countries does not mean the demise of liberal thinking; socialist parties in Europe e.g. UK, have taken on idea of social liberalism; present debates in British politics looks like a dialogue between the more classical liberals and social liberals rather than conservative/socialist state
Liberal view on human naturehumans are self seeking, largely self reliant creatures; governed by reason and capable of persona development via education
liberal view on societysociety not an entity in its own right but a collection of individuals; society consists of voluntary contractual agreements made by self interested human beings; there exists a general balance of interests in society that promotes harmony
Roots of liberalismdeveloped after the breakdown of feudalism in Europe and the growth of a market society in its place; it reflected the aspirations of the rising middle classes whose ideas conflicted with the established power of the landed aristocracy
Liberals on freedomgive priority to freedom as supreme individualist value; modern liberals advocate positive freedom (personal development and human flourishing)
Consequences of liberal belief in individualismties in with belief in meritocracy, belief in pluralism, toleration and autonomy
Locke on freedom and law'when there is no law, there is no freedom'
Freedom and lawlaw and govt. required - freedom does not arise in itself; social contract
Protection of rights (Locke)for Locke, govt. is established to protect natural rights (rights to life, liberty and property); if govt. violates rights of citizens, citizens have right of rebellion
T.H Green and New Liberalismimportant in developing new liberalism; believed that the unrestrained pursuit of profit (As advocated in classic liberalism) have given rise to poverty and injustice; rejected mill's claim that individuals are just utlity maximisers; belief that individuals have a degree of altruism and care = they have social as well as individual responsibilities; promoted state intervention to deal with industrialisation problems e.g. factories
Rawls on social inequalityonly justified if works to the benefit of the poorest in society
'Neo-liberal globalisation' (Heywood(neo liberalism appears to be dominant ideology of global world economy; intensified international competition = govts. seek to deregulate and lower tax to attract investment and TNCs + low fiscal expenditure to control inflation = neoliberal values; only a few states like China able to deal with neoliberal globalisation on own terms; adoption on free trade
Free tradeliberal belief in free trade and economic benefits e.g. specialisation; Cobden and bright argued that free trade would draw people into bonds of peace -> free trade after WWII has led to a decline in inter state wars
Democratisation of the worldby 2000, almost 2/3 of states had liberal democratic elements
Justice beyond bordersglobalisation and spread of media = we are more ware of global events = we can no longer confine our moral judgements to our own state = justice extends beyond borders = global justice promotion such as humanitarian intervention
Amartya Sen on developmentdevelopment offers freedom; such ideas embodies by UN
Do we know our own interest?liberalism = individuals have rational self interest; BUT, we may want things which are not in our interest e.g. smoking so what is our 'real' interest? -> liberalism rejects the idea of 'real' interests arguing that following them/claiming to know them = totalitarianism; ; only expressed counts
Liberalism and the welfare stateonly deserving poor should receive it (survival of fittest); Mill argued for the need for welfare measures despite his objection to state intervention
Hobhouseargued that extension of state is justified on human grounds; emphasised common good; welfare measures help to realise liberal values e.g. equality of opportunity, criticism of extreme laissez faire
Goodwin on distinction between liberalism and democracyliberal ideal entails no particular form of gov. so long as that govt. does not encroach upon individual rights


Question Answer
Globalisation is everywhereliberals see it as an inevitable fact; impersonal forces of trade and finance shape our lives; holidays, clothing from different places = symptoms of globalisation BUT, very little agreement about what it is
OECD definition"markets and production in different countries becoming interdependent"
David Held"transformation...of social relations and transactions"
Giddens and 4 dimensions of globalisationcapitalist world economy (dominant economic system); nation state system (world system consists of nation states which are primary political units); world military order (all states are more powerful. the military powers are divided between alliances); industrial development (expansion of globally interdependent force of labour)
Giddens on definition of globalisation"local happenings are shaped by events occurring many thousands of miles away"
5 definitions globalisation (Scholte)internationalisation (national economies increasingly interconnected but remain distinct economic units; not same as globalisation which is where national economies become parts of an undifferentiated global whole); liberalisation (removal of borders and economic controls); universalisation (spread of knowledge and media to all parts of the world); westernisation (spread of mcdonlalds, etc.); deterritorialisation (social space no longer restricted to geographic boundaries e.g. internet = best one for explaining globalisation)
Nation states have lost control to the marketbetween 1945-80, countries were free to pursue their own economic policies = nation state is independent; now, national economic conditions are determined by global economic forces which ultimately impact domestic politics of nation states
Growth of world market (global GDP per capita between 1950-1998)growing from $2,114 to $5,709
Growth of the world market (cross border trade between 1968-1998)$214bn to $5.4tr
Growth of financial capitalinternational currency trading now $1.4 trillion a day; 90% of this is for speculation i.e. making money on differences between currency values = only 10% used to buy and sell actual things
Mobile capital forces states to competecountries have to use liberal policies e.g. free trade policies, cut regulation for business in order to create a market friendly environment = erosion of democracy as states can no longer choose their economic policies as they have to choose those policies or suffer from negative consequences
Factors driving globalisationtechnological change; private actors; national governments;
Factors driving globalisation (technological change)communications revolution; internet; growing R&D costs (takes more money to produce innovation); shortening of product cycles = once a company produces something, competitors quickly copy it and new one is released; companies there have to compete on the world market to finance their activities, can't just trade in national market
Factors driving globalisation (private actors)a study in 2011 found that 1,318 firms owned 60% of global revenues; MNCs have a lot of power and have driven globalisation
Factors driving globalisation (national governments)growth in the power of financial capital due to actions of govts. ; deregulation from the 1980s (Reagan and Thatcher) = national governments are authors, not victims of globalisation; states were not made to but chose to pursue neo liberal economic policies
Different schools of thought on globalisationhard globalisationists , moderate globalisationists, soft globalisationists
Hard globalisationistsnational state is finished, world economy is all dominant, no such thing as national economy e.g. Ohm
Moderate globalisationistsnational state is losing power to the market, the state is becoming 1 actor amongst many e.g. MNCs, EU, etc.
Soft globalisationsnational state is not in decline and is still actively involved in economic relations; national prosperity depends on state's policies; states are taking it upon themselves to determine economic conditions; e.g. Giddens
Sceptics of globalisationvast majority of production and exchange takes place within national boundaries e.g. firms selling within the country itself; novelty is exaggerated - capital is no more mobile than at beginning of the 20th century; never a 'golden age' of state control e.g. 1930s Great Depression; no necessary convergence around neoliberalism e.g. Scandinavian countries can exist in a globalised world while being able to maintain welfare states, etc. = political regulation of the economy still possible; regionalisation, not globalisation
Sceptics of globalisation - regionalisationFDI remains highly concentrated within and between the major industrial nations (around 60% of world trade located in main capitalist states of Europe, US and South East Asia); global corporations not actually global but based in a few key countries e.g. Apple, Starbucks - largely based in US and promote US values; movement of capital = exaggerated. moving factories is hard and other criteria such as infrastructure will dictate where it moves = regionalisation; most 'important' figures in human culture are concentrated in Europe and US; map of the internet = clustered in Europe and US
Criticisms of globalisationenvironmental costs (increased travel, global consumer culture, population growth) ; corporatism (lack of diversity, global economy monopolised by a few corporations) ; no power (out of control system, people feel powerless and alienated, democracy undermined and disempowering)
Positives of globalisationfacilitates greater variety (more on shop shelf + driven by consumer culture = we are in control) ; good for reducing poverty (e.g. in China, % of population living in absolute poverty between 1981 and 2008 has declined from 84% to 13%); internet = driver and driven by globalisation
James Rosenau on growth of transnational forces and actorstransitional organisations e.g. Amazon, problems e.g. terrorism, events e.g. 9/11 - made global instantly by media , communities e.g. religion spread around world, structures e.g. finance
William Rees Mogg on impact of cyber economy20th century nation state built partly on ability to tax and spend a large proportion of income on defence, welfare, etc; shift of taxable transactions to cyberspace = difficult to regulate and tax = decline in tax revenues; emergence of cyber rich and cyber poor
Argument against the idea that there is now a world political systemorganisations such as the UN/EU have problems in securing compliance and attracting loyalty as they lack legitimacy of most national governments e.g. most people do not see themselves as 'citizens of the EU' but remain loyal to their country
Ohmae on consumer culture and the nation stateconsumers don't care about nation states when purchasing products e.g. don't care about its impact on employment/trade deficits and where the product is from. We just care about the price, quality of product = we are becoming nationality-less
Consequences of us being more globally awaree.g. more awareness of terrorism and celebrity culture; some groups who feel threatened by it may try and limit rate of change e.g. authoritarian regimes, Eurosceptics, protection of national identity
Massey on 'power geometry'different social groups have different relation to globalisation and are more in charge of it than others = rich get richer, poor get poorer
Role of institutions such as IMFthey promote economic orthodoxy by placing conditions of reform and policy when giving loans = governments lose the ability to dictate policy. some believe they are a veiled means of exporting the values and interests of the US
Giddens on increasing rate of technology usageit took 40 years for radio in the US to gain an audience of 40 million. It took the 4 years for the same number of Americans to start using the internet
Giddens on globalisation and collapse of soviet unionglobalisation is reason why it collapsed. Soviet communism could not compete with global electronic economy. Cultural control on which its authority was based could not survive an era of global media e.g. it could not prevent audio and TV broadcasts e.g. TV played a role in 1989 revolutions
Giddens on exploitation of poor countrieslow safety and environmental regulations exploited by TNCs who sell poor quality drugs and destructive pesticides
Heywood on slowdown of globalisation after 1990sslowdown in pace, reinforced by events such as 9/11; increasing multipolarity e.g. East vs. West
Cultural imperialismglobalisation results in Westernisation + homogenisation (does this prevent war?)

Recent badges