The focus is on increasing the national income of a country and the trade-offs between environmental protection and accumulation of wealth and maintain inter-generational equity are tackled with market prices that is used as a corrective mechanism for social, distributional and environmental concerns. This growth model is a means to a larger end that is- human development and how people can aspire to what they wish to be exercising their real freedoms. This model puts people before the market economy and revolves around the development of the individual to its full potential. According to Dre`ze and Sen, “In recent years, development economics has been also taking a more inclusive view of the nature of economic development. One way of seeing development is in terms of the expansion of the real freedoms that the citizens enjoy to pursue the objectives they have reason to value, and in this sense the expansion of human capability can be, broadly, seen as the central feature of the process of development ” (Dre`ze & Sen,
This theory simply states that the poverty in what’s so called “Underdeveloped and developing nations” is because of the group of wealthy Elites in those countries who work hand-in-hand with the Western Capitalists in order to monopolies the industries and take advantage of the cheap natural resources. The external political, economic and cultural has a forceful influence on the poorer nations. This has created an international division between the countries, they either the dominant or dependent. A perfect example would the issue of Crude Oil. Today, a barrel of Crude Oil is sold at 47.60 dollars to European countries, now it doesn’t make any sense for something that is known as the Black Gold to
Moreover, classical liberalism believes that there should be little adequate intervention to the private owners from being too powerful to the economy and monopolies occur. Secondly, new liberalism also called the social liberalism which challenges personal liberty and private property as it states that this will cause unequal distribution in wealth and cause a wide gap between the rich and the poor. It believes that government should intervene the society to avoid inequality happens. In contrast, neo- liberalism believes government intervention is a waste of time and money since the government needs to spend a lot of money and this will reduce their revenue in return and , it emphasis on equality of opportunity and free market in the economy. Utilitarianism introduced that the main purpose for government is the increase the level of utility in the society.
According to the economic argument the global competition motivates the employees to minimize the labour cost as much as possible. (Gooijer, 2007) This leads to a shrink in the welfare state. The ideological argument combines the two beliefs of neo-liberalism and individualization further legitimizing the need to shrink the welfare state. According to him these arguments have led to decrease in governmental interference in functioning of market and led to uneven distribution of wealth among people. (Gooijer, 2007) Moving to the right side of the two extremes
In addition, there are two principles that work within domestic level rather than international is laissez-fire, which means nonintervention on the side of government attitudes toward the society, and social welfare that indicates social services provided by a state for the benefit of its citizens. Furthermore, liberal theory regards the domestic circumstances of states as crucial variables and alternating in explaining their international behavior, in other words, liberals assume unlike realists that what goes on inside states has a fundamental and undeniable impact on how they behave internationally. Liberalism tells us that the make-up of different types of political systems, which affect their foreign policy decisions. For instance, democracies are meaningfully different from dictatorships as well as liberalism tells us that values (ideas) beyond national survival matter; thus, while realist principles may exert strong influence over the decisions of policy makers, liberal ideas cannot be not ignored—if they are, the results will often be disastrous. This paper examines how liberalism works in foreign policy and can liberal peace be effectively maintained and expanded without provoking
This has led to little hope for improvements in export position, which is crucial in its potential, export oriented growth. Liberalization has led to increased income inequalities between the world’s richest countries and the world’s poorest countries. As long as there exists an ignorance for the side effects of the neo-liberal economics, development and just growth is seen as relatively farfetched, even in the long run. External factors are the foundation for the underdevelopment in most developing countries and are still hindering development by allowing more developed countries to exploit them. Even though internal adjustments must also take place in order to see development, the external factors must change first allowing for internal
Ideally development would be the key to the eradication of poverty. The theoretical idea of development can be illustrated through the intent of the colonial era. Western nations wanted to spread technologies and policies that led their respective nations to undeveloped nations, again theoretically, to improve the quality of life for the undeveloped nations. In theory this is a positive process for the people of the undeveloped nations, however, Rist and McMichael agree that development has not materialize in this way, and rather development became corrupt and propagates poverty of nations
But the political agenda of providing a common foundation for world governance throughout the world does exist, if only for the sake of the ideal of free trade. As mentioned above, the theory of economic liberalism has a theory of public goods as an imperfect substitute for a theory of the state, and one can at least imagine a similar approach to the discussion of international relations. In short, if a liberal theory of international relations is to apply the theory of the domestic market economy to the international economy, then the suppliers of public goods who are tacitly assumed to exist in the domestic economy should also be assumed to exist in the international economy. The mainstream of existing theory on international relations has in fact ignored this necessary requirement. However, we must consider the question of public
Thus the above notions are “class-committed” rather than being “class-neutral”. On an historical account the classical economists were committed to the affairs of the British industrialist class not only in its struggle against the landlord class but also in its fight against the labourers as they considered this class of people to be the torch-bearers of progress and development as it would lead to the welfare of the state as a whole. Ricardo’s arguments in his model of comparative advantage theory showcases us some of the unrealistic and irrational assumptions. He stated that specialisation which is based on domestic comparative advantage is either naturally or artificially determined, but it is unrealistic to think that specialisation can be
Some post-development scholars have seen development as imposed program on developing countries by developed ones. Due to this, they consider development itself as problems. But even if the arguments are true, it seems to argue based on unrealistic criticism since development is naturally world phenomenon and can be internally motivated with attached dynamic nature of upward improvements of any