The Parallel Existence And Mutual Interaction Of State And Market Essay

Although global actors can sometimes have considerable power over states, the extent of this power ultimately depends on the relative power and influence of the state in question. Large developed states, such as the US, are extremely powerful compared to most other global actors and are not often influenced by their actions. However, small and undeveloped states are not always completely powerless. To determine whether states are indeed the most powerful global actors, we must look at the relative powers of trans-national corporations (TNCs), non-government organisations (NGOs) and some of the institutions of global governance.

Globalization is the process by which the markets of different countries become integrated due to the exchange of goods, services, technology, and capital. Globalization depends on social, economic, and political factors, and continuously alters the way that the world works. All the vital components of the evolving global, political, economic and social institutions being examined seem to constantly converge and to perpetually intertwine during the day to day administration of global affairs. Diplomacy is employed to keep a measured balance between conflict and cooperation. The global guarantees of international law are placed in sharp contrast to the grim reality of human rights on daily basis and policy is dictated by the scales of political power and the urgent priorities of economic necessity. To understand how the globe functioned in the past and how it wishes to function in the future, we must study each factor separately and observe its inevitable interactivity with the other factors that occur. It is important to note that none of the dynamics can be given greater weight in comparison to the other crucial instrumentalities.

The era of globalization has witnessed the growing influence of a number of unconventional international actors, from non-governmental organizations, to multi-national corporations, to global political movements. Traditional, state-centric definitions of foreign policy

Global Political Economy is essentially a study of a political battle between the winners and losers of global economic exchange. In fact, understanding global economy relies on a clear knowledge of the process of political competition. Political power possessed by actors regulates economic activity and in turn this creates the basis for and affects political power. Through, critical analysis of the concept of global political economy it becomes clear that there are three prominent theories that form GPE, mercantilism, economic liberalism and Marxism.

A free market is a type of market that the government is not involved in. Since the government does not care about what happens, the free market is also called “hands-off” or “let it be economics”. The government is limited to protect the citizens from the danger and that is the major goal for the government. In the free market economy, there are three components of the free market economy: competition, active but limited government, and the self-interest. Competition is one of the main components of the free market economy. Competition means that the companies compete with one another to make more benefits to themselves. According to the concept of the free market economy, the competition means a good thing because it is a basic

Free markets have often been idealized in the US, and have become a dominant tool for trade and distribution of goods and services. There have been multiple waves of government regulation and deregulation of the market in US history. Each of these trends have been grappling with the central question of how sufficient markets are at satisfying our goals. In theory, free markets are fair and efficient at distributing goods and services. In reality, however, government must intervene in the marketplace for two overarching reasons. First, because in practice free markets left to themselves are not always fair and efficient. And second, because fairness and efficiency are not our only goals and

In the current international economic system, the behaviors and interactions of emerging states indicate that the previous norms of an open, global, and liberal international economy are being replaced with their own interests, which Stewart Patrick as well as Andrew Nathan and Andrew Scobell examine in their articles.

The year is 2015 and every state is trying to define borderless border as the world is becoming smaller due to positive and negative progress in the different habits of society, markets, technologies, economies, and politics. Advances concerns the international relation realms body is this new era of the “age of globalization” as the world becomes flatter, actively horizontal, with their inter-state policies aimed in the global-economics more than ever constitutes the inverse role from individual to state opposite to the presumed assumption of state-individual structure relation. However, divisions are still harshly marked within groups made up by the same individuals composing

The world is not a large and strange place anymore. The world is a place that is interconnected and intertwined. The world has become from a place that each country and their peoples are separate and isolated to a place that each country and their peoples are part of a global network. Thanks to globalization this is occurring. Globalization is the ‘international integration” or ‘de-bordering’ – “a number of highly disparate observations whose regular common denominator is the determination of a profound transformation of the traditional nation-state” (Von Bogdandy 2). Globalization is connecting different people from different cultures and backgrounds together. More and more corporations are entering new foreign markets to sell their

Zakaria describes what he terms the rise of the rest as a consequence of the continuous efforts of American politicians and diplomats urging countries to “open their markets, free up their politics, and embrace trade and technology” (60). The basis idea of this book highlights the United States road to being a global superpower and how its stagnation during recent decades have caused a striking shift from America being the world’s only actor to a weakening, less dominating player in the international system. Although this realization is alarming, this actually means good for America. Ultimately, Zakaria describes a world where countries are “more open, market friendly, and democratic” (242) because of the good old United States.

“Strong and sustained American leadership is essential to a rules-based international order that promotes global security and prosperity as well as the dignity and human rights of all peoples.” This statement from the most recent U.S. National Security Strategy indicates that the White House administration acknowledges the current international order is shaped constitutionally, or is “rule-based.” Globalization has made states and individuals increasingly interdependent and interconnected. Globalization is an “umbrella term” used to describe the interconnectedness, integration, and transcontinental interdependence of people and states; it occurs on several dimensions: economic, political, security, and social/cultural. Constructivism best explains how globalization spreads cultural norms, values, and interests resulting in constitutional orders between states that “evolve over time through interaction between agents and social structures.” As such, the international order will change through state collaboration in institutions and organizations, economic interdependence between states, and the sharing of cultural norms particularly through the advancing platform of technology.

Globalization involves a variety of links expanding and tightening a web of political, economic and cultural inter-connections. Most attention has been devoted to merchandise trade as it has had the most immediate (or most visible) consequences, but capital, in and of itself, has come to play an arguably even larger role than the trade in material goods. Human movements also link previously separate communities. Finally, there is the cultural connection. All the individual data would indicate that we are undergoing a process of compression of international time and space and an intensification of international relations. The separation of production and consumption that is the heart of modern capitalism appears to have

It is not only unnecessary for the government to intervene to maintain a free market, it is extremely wrong. Intervention by any outside party in corporate matters is inappropriate and basically contradicts the meaning of a free market.

In regard to the issue of globalization, realist had a negative view about it. According to realism, globalization will only increase interdependence among states, causing insecurity (Kay, 2004). It also suggests that it will raise suspicion because the distribution of power is unequal, and it “favors the dominant international actors” (Kay, 13). The major challenge for realist is the role of power and the gains and loss of a state due to globalization. On one hand, a state can utilize globalization to advance their own interest and gain and exert power; on the other hand, interdependence can cause vulnerability which can lead to conflict (Kay, 2004). In a realist world globalization is basically a strategy in the competition for power between several major countries.

Although it is right that globalization promotes free trade among the states and unites them, but there are also negative outcomes, which states whether rich or poor try to protect their own interests? These negative outcomes of globalization have made the dependency theory significant in describing the state of affairs in the present world. Poor countries attempt to protect their national markets and become self-reliant (Hewison, 1999). Self-reliance can be seen as supporting a strategy of controlled relations with the world economy. Poor nations should only approve relations on the condition that the relations will enhance the societal and financial well being of the larger population. However, endeavour by the peripheral states to oppose the impact of dependency can result in results in financial sanctions and/or military attack (Sen, 2010). One example of such resentment against globalization is “localism“that surfaced during the financial crisis in Thailand (Hewison, 1999). Localism is an illustration of populist response to the changes and disparities created by globalization. Localism gained substantial energy from the Thai King’s speech in 1997, where he recommended a self-contained economy to counter the negative effects