Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

comparative theories - Coggle Diagram

- - - - liberals think GG is both possible and desirable - argue this is increasingly case for globalised world with common problems
      - realists see GG negatively - erodes sovereignty and is ineffective
    - - liberals GG enables countries to work together (trade blocks and trade agreements) with some degree of accountability - more effective for global economy as well as fairer system - especially true for neoliberalism
      - realists see economic GG as impinging state sovereignty - argue is largely ineffective
  - - - liberals place great value on upholding HR and promoting a standard - GG helps to promote end enforce this
      - realists see HR as area where sovereignty can be breached and tend to take their view that nation states are responsible for their own citizens
      - some realists agree with R2P on the basis that a state is no longer sovereign entity once it has become failed state
    - - liberals environment as key example of where necessary to have international co-operation - GG enables this to happen
      - realists GG is futile since states will continue to act in way which benefits themselves
  - - - increased regionalism creating power battles at regional level as well as at the global level
      - multipolarity as time of instability - arguing that it was much more stable during the cold war era's bipolarity or under unipolarity of true hegemon
  - - - increased regionalism and pooling of sovereignty as an effective way to create regional stability as well as benefit GG by streamlining multilateral organisations
    - - critical of any erosion of state sovereignty see it as largely ineffectual since only works as long as it benefits the strongest states