Marxists contradicts with them and asserts that equal rights that liberalism establishes are valueless.
Therefore, Marxism makes liberal a consent-based world order in that material power limits individuals from exercising their rights. This is not a valid condemnation from Marxism because, even though one has a right to own anything, then, the world would remain uncontrollable.
Finally, are the alternative world orders presented by these theories realistic? Explain?'
The international world orders presented by these theories are very realistic because we are able to evaluate the international relations from a theoretical point-of-view. Similar to the New World Order, these world orders offer a conceptual structure on which an individual can evaluate the global relations.
Earth in 2113
What type of system is this?
The type of system presented in this case is the Multi-polarity system. This system comprises a number of influential nations that exercises a balance power. In this system, the essential values are clear to every state actor, and the actors must adhere to the set norms and incase they fail to follow them they drop out from this system.
What type of order will emerge from this system? Why?
Multipolarity order emerges from this system, which means it is a world that comprises a number of balancing centres of power.
Based on the order that emerges, what are the chances that the major challenges faced by humanity can be addressed?
With Multi-polarity order, it will be certain that the world would have transformed. There is tremendous spread of capabilities, in terms of wealth and power politics, which seems to shift from the North and West towards the East and South. The older order under the United States and Europe is paving way for a world that comprises non-western developing states and non-state actors. Most people would consider this as a transition to multi-polarity.
However, it is uncertain how this nations and non-state actors will shape wealth and power. There are high chances that these nations will embrace the central features...
If the transition pushes through towards this direction, there is a possibility of international conflict, which will be unavoidable and predetermined. There is also a possibility of global war. The rising nations might consider it as an opportunity but, on the other hand, it might be a global change with huge problems. It would therefore be very difficult for these rising nations to address such challenges because they might lack influence in the north and west. They would face many challenges trying to create alliances with nations that once experienced the aspect of balance of power.
References
Cox, R.W. (1983).'Gramsci, Hegemony, and International Relations: An Essay in Method'.
Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 12/2, 162 -- 175.
Embong, A.R. (2001). 'Globalisation and Transnational Class Relations: Some Problems of Conceptualization'. Mittelman and Othman: 92 -- 106.
Grieco, M. (1988).Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest
Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol. 42, No. 3 pp. 485-507
Held, D. & McGrew, A. (1998). The End of the Old Older? Globalization and the Prospects for World Order, Review of International Studies, Vol. 24, The Eighty Years' Crisis 1919-
1999 (Dec., pp. 219-243
Nye, J. (1991). Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power, Political science:
International relations, New York: Basic Books.
Rupert, M. 2000. Ideologies of Globalisation: Contending Visions of a New World Order.
London: Routledge.
Tilly, C. (1990). Coercion, Capital, and European States: AD990-1990. Cambridge MA:
Blackwell.
Wight, M. (1973). "The Balance of Power and International Order," in Alan James, ed. The
Bases of International Order. London: Oxford University Press.
William, I. (2005): Gramsci and Globalisation: From Nation-State to Transnational Hegemony,
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 8:4, 559-574
