The Twenty Years Crisis Summary

Precisely, as stated by Irreconcilable William Borah in a speech to the Senate in 1918, the League of Nations in particular stands no chance at imposition, and certainly does not stand on its own, for it clearly, contradictorily advocates for the very measures that it seemingly goes against: “The first proposition connected with the proposed league is that of a tribunal to settle the matters of controversy which may arise between the different nations. Will anyone advocate that those matters which are of vital importance to our people shall be submitted to a tribunal created other than by our own people and give it an international army subject to its direction and control to enforce its decrees? I doubt if anyone will advocate that … if you do not do so, Mr. President, what will your league amount to? … In its last analysis the proposition is force to destroy force, conflict to prevent conflict, militarism to destroy militarism, war to prevent war. In its last analysis it must be that if it has any sanction behind its judgment at all.

As seen in the unification of the aforementioned countries, nationalism always leads to some form of international tension. Most particular to this time, absence of an international body capable of lessening the tension practically made World War II inescapable. As shown by the League of Nations’ powerless depiction as a rabbit (Doc. E) in the face of international strife and as evidenced by the un-intervened nature of the chaotic Spanish Civil War (Doc. K), the world anxiously recognized during this time that WWII would be right around the

Utopian societies are never perfect and in reality, many fall short of what perfect societies should convey. Many utopian societies conveyed in novels introduce the bright side of the society, but those utopias also contain a disturbing side to their existence. Utopias that are conveyed in novels such as Divergent and “‘Repent, Harlequin!’ Said the Ticktockman” have differences such as their culture, environment, and overall setup, while simultaneously having similarities with their foundations. Many sources support the claim of utopias, such as the short story “‘Repent, Harlequin!’ Said the Ticktockman” by Harlan Ellison.

Thomas More had an abundance of revolutionary ideas for his time, many of which he penned down in his famous work Utopia. More’s greatest focus in this short book is placed on exploring the possibilities and benefits of a new kind of government. His views on such things as freedom, community, and the innate nature of man were all considered when creating what More views as the epitome of a successful government. It is baffling to realize that, using these same principles of freedom, community, and the innate nature of man, another author could come to a conclusion in direct opposition with More’s outcome.

Similar to the domestic level, when analyzing the international level, they found nations go to war because they exist in a state of anarchy. This was directly due to a lack of a world government. This led Liberal Internationalists, such as Wilson, to believe that in order to prevent wars on the global scale, they must implement the League of

Despite the fact that the League of Nations could solemnize its successfulness, the organization had obviously questioned its miscarriage and which points were completely wrong. This flop, notably in the 1930’s, intensively displayed the frailty of the League of Nations and played a catalytic role in the explosion of World War 2 in 1939. During the period of 1920’s the miscarriages of the League of Nations were, in essence, a small-scale and did not hector world peace and prosperity. Nonetheless, they set a symbol, which the League of Nations could not settle, the problems if the protagonists (more power countries) did not ‘play the game’. Article 11 of the League’s Treaty specified: “Any war or threat of war is a matter of concern to the whole League and the League shall take action that may safeguard

For an utopian society to exist, there needs to be a merging of conformity and individualism in the society. Pure individualism or pure conformity in a society leads to a lopsided and corrupted society; they need to exist in synchrony. In Merry Mount, the people follow an ideology of complete freedom of thought and of individualism. The Puritan’s society shows what happens when everyone conforms and no one expresses their individual beliefs. When the ideologies of conformity and individualism merge it combines into a greater society as a whole, better than either of the individual half’s.

His program was an idealistic plan for peace promoting open diplomacy to remove cause for conflict, deal with territorial integrity and endorsed an international peace keeping organisation: The League of Nations. Although the Fourteen Points were imposed on the Treaty of Versailles that ultimately failed it became an important part of the idealistic ideas in Americas Foreign Policy during the 20th Century. The idea behind the League of Nations, which was also unsuccessful, has prevailed, having a lasting impact on modern day society in the United

Political theorists, whether they are realists, or liberalists, over the centuries, have come into conflict over what they believe to be the utmost important task of the state. Hobbes believes the most important task of the state is to ensure law and order, rooting his argument in the idea of a sovereign ruler. On the other hand, Rawls, a modern theorist, firmly believes that a state should focus on realising justice within their society. While a utopian society cannot be achieved by either of these theories, I will highlight why Rawls was right in his assumption that the main focus of a state should be to ensure justice for all within their nation, through analysing and comparing the conflicting arguments of Hobbes and Rawls.

national politics Adam Watson’s Evolution of International Society gave a new dimension in the understanding of international relations (IR). He deeply studied comparatively the formation of international society and political community of the past which has evolved into the modern world system in his ‘Evolution of International Society’. Unlike Kenneth Waltz views of anarchy as the only system in IR, Watson says there are two systems viz. anarchy and hierarchy. In between these systems is the hegemony which defines the contemporary IR.

It is heavily influenced from the Groation tradition. According to this perspective, regimes are much more pervasive and exist in all areas of international relations. Contrary to the conventional structure and modified structural, this viewpoint moves away from realist thinking as it is “too limited to explain an increasingly complex, interdependent, and complex world.” This approach rejects the assumption that the international system is comprised of states and the balance of power is solely due to force. Rather, it argues that elites are the principal actors and that they have national and transnational ties.

The belief of an ideal such as the public good has been the fuel for past leaders that have sought to establish a world of harmony. Plato’s dialogue “The Republic” has sparked countless publications creating such utopian worlds in which the good of the many is sought. The United Nations established the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” so as to lay the foundation for the good of the public in contemporary times. Revolutionists willing to sacrifice their very lives for the public good are admired for their courage and fearlessness. Yet; history also contains moments when a leaders’ profession to care for the public good was manifested through Nazi concentration camps, Communist societies and the adherence of principles set for Machiavelli’s

The current work is meant to explain the differences and similarities between the most dominant theories in international relations, Realism and Liberalism, both theories have some similarities and differences but much more important and interesting is to discuss and explain what differs and makes similar both theories. Conflicts and wars, Similarities and differences between Realism and Liberalism: Both Liberalism and Realism believes that there is no world government that can prevent countries to go to war on one another. For both theories military power is important and both Realism and Liberalism can understand that countries can use military power to get what they need or want. Also, both theories are conscious that without military

It believes that all individuals are born with an increasing desire to own power hardwired inside them. In these circumstances dominant states should do direct high power over their rivals. In the other hand, structural realism does not define the quest for power, instead it is focused on the structure of the international

This essay will examine some of the successes and failures of the League of Nations in terms of maintaining peace between countries. The successes of the League of Nations mostly involved disputes between smaller nations. In the year of 1921, the League settled one of the first disputes since its formation. The Åland Islands are located in between Sweden and Finland. The islands were controlled by Finland but the majority of the population was Swedish, and they wanted to be controlled by Sweden.