From the 1870’s to 1900’s, Britain had one of the largest and most powerful armies in the world. With that sort of potential, it would’ve been a mistake not to colonize Africa. Taking control of the tip of Africa was extremely strategic of Britain, as from there they could control the trading routes and begin settling for future invasions and in the end, colonization. Also, the new Capitalist society forming because of Britain’s industrial revolution developed social problems many obvious social problems. The gap between the rich and the poor was larger than ever, and homelessness was on the rise as cities became extremely dense and overpopulated.
I agree that with globalization created opportunities for social movements to be heard at global scale. Moghadam (1999) also suggest that globalization has increased the “trend toward multilateralism, in which the United Nations plays a key role, national non-governmental organizations act as watchdogs over governments, and international NGOs increase their activities and influence”. My take here is that the UN takes more of watchdog role than that of enforcer of policy commitments. With this ascribed role we have really seen to a large extent most nations especially those from the south being held accountable and influenced somewhat by the United Nations and other Bretton Woods institution, yet this accountability is not as binding legally but politically. Was the decision to target
Regional economic cooperation and integration do have important security dimensions and implications. This is because economic cooperation and integration may be driven by the desire to reduce the likelihood of political or military conflict between the states involved. SADC and COMESA were founded on this basis. The economic regionalism has also the self-protecting response with security overtones to economic globalization. By working together in regional groups, states can help to protect markets and industries in their region, increase their competitiveness in the global economy and strengthen their hand in global economic forms such as the World trade Organisation (WTO).
The general aspect of regionalism and regionalization in both political and economic scope has gained traction across global economies in the recent past. Nevertheless, with the advent of globalization, coupled with hitherto closed economies embracing neo-liberal economic ideas, there has been a massive upsurge of the two ideas in the last decade across the globe. Despite the traction and buzz created by the two terms, there has been a profound lacuna in the general meaning and understanding of the two ideas among global citizens (Mansfield & Solingen, 2010). In this regard, it is imperative to pose the questions, what are the salient differences between regionalism and regionalization? And what are the most recognizable political and economic logic of regionalism and regionalization?
Hoover’s presidential actions , on the other hand, increased government involvement in economics. During the Great Depression, rates of unemployment were high and the yearning for economic stability swept over the entire nation. Under Hoover’s administration, there was the implementation of higher taxes such as the Hawley-Smoot tariff. There were multiple government involved programs Hoover attempted to implement that would provide support from “local and national agencies” which would provide relief to citizens. (Document 2).
Europe’s imperial ambition that resulted in many deaths, corrupted states, famines and genocides During approximately the 1860’s the competitive Western Nations were in desperate need of domination and therefore started the expansion of their territories overseas. On account of the fact that they finally gained the essential privileges and advantages for a “successful” colonisation, for instance steamships, weapons and quinine medicine, they decided to place their countries’ individual interests in front of the importance of several nations’ futures. In the end of the 19th century (in 1870s) more than 10% of the African territory, mostly around the coastal lines, was controlled by the power-hungry colonial powers who saw this domination as a symbol of prestige and authority of their own nation. Less than 30 years later the possessions of European countries in Africa have already made as much as 90,4% of the continent. The Imperialistic division of the African continent was The scramble of Africa, committed by the Western Countries.
Oil price fluctuations is a germane issue in Nigeria which constituted a major disturbance in the foreign direct investment (FDI) to the Nigerian economy despite various reforms introduced and implemented by Nigerian authorities to attract FDI. The over-reliance on oil as a major revenue generation and collapse in our export are issues for concern. The linkage amongst foreign direct investment (FDI), oil price and export and economic growth are still a vital subject in the developing economies. In practice, FDI inflows consider a one of the source of a long run economic growth (Bosworth, Collins et al. 1999) and as a crucial source for increasing the capital stock of a country (Barro and Sala-i-Martin, 1995).
technology. All in all, transfer of technology can help African countries in all aspect of their economies toward development. The last but not the least forward matching for the African countries when it comes to development has to do with strategically positioning themselves in the world capitalist system being perpetuated by globalization and its compelling forces. In order for globalization to have positive impacts on Africa’s development, national governments must have the choice to choose among apt monetary, fiscal, trade, macroeconomic and other economic and social policies without heavy-handed intrusion by the developed countries and the multilateral institutions these countries control. In short, a more democratic international economic
(UN Web Services Section | Department of Public Information, 2009). The United Nations has an importance in addressing the issues on global, economic and social issues since United Nations is the one who is implementing policies among states when they are signatory to this. Thus, the Charter of United Nations helps to keep the international placidity and sanctuary; to obtain a potent general measures for the suppression of indication of danger on peace. It also gives policy on a settlement of international disputes among territory. It also recuperates better relations between nations on the basis of self determination and equal rights.
Driven by such motive, Nwakwo (2013) pointed out that the day-to-day dealings of incumbent administrations are targeted at actualizing their goals and objectives while governing their countries. Whilst some of the goals can be attained by a country on its own, in most cases “Nations seek the active cooperation and sometimes assistance of other Nations in an attempt to achieve their national objectives”. And in concepts of international relations, Ojo and Sessay posits that this is the very reason why a Nation such as the Federal Republic of Nigeria necessarily has to be in communication with its external environment Ideally, a Nation’s domestic and foreign policy ought to be complementary in outline. Although, the former is to be implemented in the domestic environment, that is, within the territory of that Nation; the latter is designed for the international milieu. Nevertheless, both policies often enjoy a smooth relationship; but, a Nation’s domestic policy can sometimes run contrary to those that are foreign oriented.