2x2: Look at Preferences


The 2x2 really brought these concepts into perspective this week in class. It separates situations into columns of autonomy and attunement, and rows of impermeable and permeable. I really was drawn to the top half of the graph. What are the sources of national subnational interests? In other words, how do states formulate preferences?

It is difficult to determine what are preferences because they are not directly observable. The best we can do is observe the behavior of states and leaders, we do can not know their true motivations. Interfering factors like institutions, uncertainty, and the strategic setting could cause actors to stray away from their preferences or act in contradiction to them. In this sense, actions do not always reflect preferences.

I would look at preferences as being the way an actor orders possible outcomes of an interaction. Given preferences, an actor can form strategies based on the possibilities presented by the environment. Liberalism holds that state preferences are the primary determinant of state behavior. Preferences, naturally, vary from state to state with differences in culture, economic system or government type. Thus, liberalism argues that the behavior of a single state not only reflects its preferences, but the the configuration of preferences of all states.

Comments

  1. EHMay 31, 2018 at 9:16 PM

    Interesting note that preferences change across cultures. To revisit Hobbes, do you think that he would agree that there is space for differing cultures to have alternate systems of governance, or do you think that he would theorize that all humans want the same things, regardless of culture?

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownJune 2, 2018 at 8:12 AM

    You know that's a good point, because I did note that Hobbes doesn't really mention different cultures. I think this is because he sees all mankind as starting from the same place and only looking to survival. It was one they submitted to a sovereign and no longer had to solely focus on survival and the fear associated in that state that he would probably say cultures formed.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anarchy in the USA

           While discussing realist motives and intentions, it seems that the United States is headed down a curious path worth looking at. Clearly a powerful nation, the United States should be in a unique position to latch onto globalization in order to secure a stable future. Calm, cool, collected domination is a much better look than ramping up rhetoric and perceived might, because your neighbor's interest to attack is seemingly when they are most threatened by show of force.             The United States has long taken advantage of its allies, while using economic bargaining to secure peaceful existence. The European Union is a clear ally in the spread of Democracy and Capitalism, two tenants central to the existence of the United States. It is this point that makes recent events troubling with regards to a peaceful future.             In an effort to bolster nationalism, our country has tur...
Read more

Waltz's Neorealism

The reading by Waltz points out some key points that Neorealists believe in. Neorealists view power as a possibly useful means. Neorealism contends that international politics can be understood only if the effects of structure are added to the unit-level explanations of traditional realism. It rejects the assumption that man’s innate lust for power constitutes a sufficient cause of war in the absence of of any other. Specifically, we need to look at the causal link interacting units and international outcomes. We’ve established before with Hobbes that the system we live in is anarchy. States are rational actors that at their basest level want to survive. Neorealism states that within an anarchy, states need to provide their own security to protect themselves from threats. This security dilemma is a problem, war occurs. This depends on situations and characteristics of states, not because states want to have war. The more important question then becomes what started th...
Read more

Corporations Will Run Amuck

Corporations help create domestic and global economic prosperity. However, when they grow extremely rich they can become powerful which may threaten sovereign actors’ authority, both on a national and international level. Additionally, through hefty donations their lobbying capability allows them to manipulate politicians and the political process undermining democratic processes and devaluing the voice of the people.  In order to prevent corporations from interfering with the democratic processes there needs to be an overarching system that monitors what corporations do and how they do it. To a certain extent room and flexibility may help corporations better compete against one another. Capitalist societies like the United States believe that less regulations on corporations means more incentive to be innovative. And while that may be true to some extent, there are also many abuses these companies commit in order to maximize their profits. Without strict gui...
Read more