Keeping Peace In The Future Essays - International Relations Theory

Keeping Peace In The Future In my opinion there are two main ways of securing peace in the up coming decades. The first way is that of a realist approach and a liberal one. In the eyes of a realist, national security can one hand only be reached by a destructive capability and the ability to intimidate anyone that defies or threatens national security. On the other, the realist will however not intervene if conflicts do not measure up with national interest. Either way, the realists believe this and this alone would maintain the peace for the future. The liberalists however believe that a more unified body with all peace-loving nations can be the best way of conflict management. They believe that any conflict in the world should be controlled before it can ever escalate in to a bigger one. To start of with the realists believe that a greater military body would create a balanced and therefor peaceful world. To achieve this the realists see possibilities of enlarging the power of NATO and other military, governmental organizations. To create more members and enlarging the firepower would in realistic eyes decrease countries to enter conflict. The liberalists find this a very poor argument. They find that with a possible expansion of NATO and increasing power of the organization that the third-world countries can be left out. Liberalists tend to think more in the format of the United Nations. They think with the Expansion of the Security Council, that global peace can be maintained in a more unified, universal manner. Also they believe that the General Assembly could increase in power and take a more serious role in international disputes and conflict resolving. By increasing this power it would call on a more responsible Secretary-General, and there as giving the United Nations as an inter-governmental body more strength, and possibly giving the world a better way of solutions. This in a realist approach is unacceptable. The unifying steps and the decreasing powers of states is not the solution for world peace. In fact they see this as a very big threat seeing that countries would be less cooperate. With this structure of the UN, it would also be much harder to strive for national interest. I believe in a combination of these two perspectives to be the key to global peace in the for coming decades and possibly centuries. If the UN would increase power, it would be vital that the United Nations would therefor create a separate body, a more secure military body that not only can be used for peace-keeping missions, but for offensive, defensive, humanitarian and finally collective security methods.

A philosphical essay on Utilitarianism.

A philosphical essay on Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a way of looking at ethics, it focuses on trying to ensure the maximum happiness in many different ways. There are many different forms of utilitarianism, the four I will discuss are act, rule, naive and preference utilitarianism.Rule utilitarianism tries to give the greatest overall benefit to society, the best rule/law of conduct is found and everyone is found an a rule utilitarian will follow it. However, this can cause problems if you use this rule in a place where it is not generally followed as problems will be caused if you differ from the general population. Another difficulty is that all the best rules would be very complicated and this would make them hard to follow and many people would not bother to follow them at all.Examples of rule utilitarianism: A man needs a lot of money to get a lifesaving operation on his heart, he doesn't have the money and contemplates robbing a bank for it.From http://hypernews.ngdc.noaa.govBecause he follows rule utilitariani sm he decides to let himself die because robbing a bank is against the rules that he believe are for the benefit of society. Another example: A man from the USA comes to Australia to live, one of the rules he believes is for the greater benefit of society s driving on the right side of the road. He is forced to go against his rule utilitarianism because of the fear of a car crash.Preference utilitarianism tries to satisfy peoples' preferences. The best action is the one which satisfies the highest amount of peoples' preferences. These preferences must only count for preferences about oneself or people might have preferences that cancel out other peoples preferences (for example: A person wishing to be rich and a person wishing for everyone to be poor),