From #7 Is Constructivism portrayed idealistic & utopian?
1. Why is Constructivism idealistic compared to Realism & Liberalism?
Although I answered that Constructivism is the most idealistic in IR, the balance between the three school of thoughts (Realism, Liberalism, & Constructivism) is obviously important. However, in terms of IR, it is ideal and significant because Constructivism concerns with the role of ideas in shaping the international society the most. Without the idea of Constructivism, I do not think IR would not develop, and nations will not have mutually beneficial relationship with each other.
2. How could a constructivist view the ongoing tensions between Japan & South Korea?
Okay, I did some research in order to answer this question, and I found a very interesting article. It's going to be long if I answer this here, so I will promise I will write about this question next week... :)
From #8 Do people with double consciousness understand society better?
1. Is being able to think within multiple perspectives more of a luxury?
(↑ a question I posted at the end of the post)
Being able to view the world is accomplished by observing and emphasizing with those in the center and in the outside. In order to create compromise and solutions to decrease the lack of awareness, one must understand both accounts. I believe everyone has a viewpoint to offer that is valuable and if one has an open mind, willing to learn from others in order to see a problem from multiple points of view that is when we will begin building stronger bridges between the center and those on the outside.
Would you agree or did you have a different answer to this question?
I absolutely agree! What I wanted to emphasize on this blog entry, was that people cannot have double consciousness even though they want to. Specific people who have gone through the tough times of being out of the margin can only have double consciousness, which they have better understanding of the society. Therefore, the closest way to understand the people out of the margin is by having different perspectives whenever you think.
From #10 The Concept of National Security
1. Do you think the Japanese government strategies for national security is liberal or constructivist?
I think the Japanese national security strategy applies both the liberal and constructivist perspective. However, I think liberal is still the main idea that they pursue. One of the reasons for my opinion is because the Japanese national security strategy focuses its national interest more on the economic and political development within the country. This represents the liberal idea of recognizing the importance of politics and economy, and that nations will not fight each other when we increase the economic mutual dependency with other countries. Although liberal is the main idea, constructivism is still necessary because Japan thinks that countries actions are going to be decided by how other countries are viewing us (therefore they raise the significance of being a non nuclear weapon holder).
From #11 What is central to International Economic Policies?
1. While growth is necessary and can be reasoned that growth will eventually lead to economic equity there is the argument that in the pursuit of this goal, the actions taken may actually cause deeper rifts and consequences to the developing nations. Do you think this is true or is growth solely a positive endeavor?
I think this is so true, because that is what exactly happened to the current developed nations. Growth is definitely viewed as one of the most significant factors, however we must understand that growth can also be the key to create larger disparity among countries which will increase inequality. I think the makes the topic of development difficult because every aspect is related to each other, and one can cause another issue.
2. How do you think economic equality could be further implemented? Would it be different from those incentives in the post WWII institutions, or would it follow an entirely new basis?
I think economic equality should be further implemented by considering the previous goals we have in the post WWII institutions. However, it is also true that the field of international development is rapidly growing and changing, and therefore we need some new aspects into the current policies. In order to deliver equity in economies, agencies should implement a more systematic understanding of equity and inequity into their policy decisions.
1. Why is Constructivism idealistic compared to Realism & Liberalism?
Although I answered that Constructivism is the most idealistic in IR, the balance between the three school of thoughts (Realism, Liberalism, & Constructivism) is obviously important. However, in terms of IR, it is ideal and significant because Constructivism concerns with the role of ideas in shaping the international society the most. Without the idea of Constructivism, I do not think IR would not develop, and nations will not have mutually beneficial relationship with each other.
2. How could a constructivist view the ongoing tensions between Japan & South Korea?
Okay, I did some research in order to answer this question, and I found a very interesting article. It's going to be long if I answer this here, so I will promise I will write about this question next week... :)
From #8 Do people with double consciousness understand society better?
1. Is being able to think within multiple perspectives more of a luxury?
(↑ a question I posted at the end of the post)
Being able to view the world is accomplished by observing and emphasizing with those in the center and in the outside. In order to create compromise and solutions to decrease the lack of awareness, one must understand both accounts. I believe everyone has a viewpoint to offer that is valuable and if one has an open mind, willing to learn from others in order to see a problem from multiple points of view that is when we will begin building stronger bridges between the center and those on the outside.
Would you agree or did you have a different answer to this question?
I absolutely agree! What I wanted to emphasize on this blog entry, was that people cannot have double consciousness even though they want to. Specific people who have gone through the tough times of being out of the margin can only have double consciousness, which they have better understanding of the society. Therefore, the closest way to understand the people out of the margin is by having different perspectives whenever you think.
From #10 The Concept of National Security
1. Do you think the Japanese government strategies for national security is liberal or constructivist?
I think the Japanese national security strategy applies both the liberal and constructivist perspective. However, I think liberal is still the main idea that they pursue. One of the reasons for my opinion is because the Japanese national security strategy focuses its national interest more on the economic and political development within the country. This represents the liberal idea of recognizing the importance of politics and economy, and that nations will not fight each other when we increase the economic mutual dependency with other countries. Although liberal is the main idea, constructivism is still necessary because Japan thinks that countries actions are going to be decided by how other countries are viewing us (therefore they raise the significance of being a non nuclear weapon holder).
From #11 What is central to International Economic Policies?
1. While growth is necessary and can be reasoned that growth will eventually lead to economic equity there is the argument that in the pursuit of this goal, the actions taken may actually cause deeper rifts and consequences to the developing nations. Do you think this is true or is growth solely a positive endeavor?
I think this is so true, because that is what exactly happened to the current developed nations. Growth is definitely viewed as one of the most significant factors, however we must understand that growth can also be the key to create larger disparity among countries which will increase inequality. I think the makes the topic of development difficult because every aspect is related to each other, and one can cause another issue.
2. How do you think economic equality could be further implemented? Would it be different from those incentives in the post WWII institutions, or would it follow an entirely new basis?
I think economic equality should be further implemented by considering the previous goals we have in the post WWII institutions. However, it is also true that the field of international development is rapidly growing and changing, and therefore we need some new aspects into the current policies. In order to deliver equity in economies, agencies should implement a more systematic understanding of equity and inequity into their policy decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment