Wednesday, October 31, 2007

embedded vs disembedded liberalism

In regards the question of rather I would prefer the political-economic system of embedded or disembedded liberalism for my country I would have to answer that I would prefer embedded liberalism. There are a number of reasons for this, the first of which being that as a citizen it would simply be to my benefit to be in favor of the system which serves social purposes. After all, if we are all so self interested, shouldn't we first be considered with how we ourselves fair from the application of each system? Second, keeping the previous reason in mind, people are more likely to comply with a government that works to their benefit. If people are more compliant with the government it is easier to get things done. If it is easier for a state to get things done, more time is allotted for relations with other states, and if more time is allotted for interstate relations then they will subsequently improve as well (in theory). Basically the entire line of reasoning for embedded liberalism being the more practical choice is the reasoning that you need to work from the bottom up. There is a saying " No whole is greater than the sum of its parts." strengthen the parts, strengthen the whole. That being said, not only does it benefit the country in question for them to focus on their domestic affairs and welfare of their people, but it also benefits all the other countries with which they have relations because by making their state more structurally sound from the inside they are increasing the potential for strength within interstate relations.

1 comment:

Travis said...

I think that you have a good point when you say that the "no whole is greater than the sum of its parts". However I would disagree with your view that embedded liberalism does more to further the well being on the people. The way I see it, the more economic freedom allowed, the more opportunities for individuals to buy, sell, and make money on their own accords. Sure, the government can work towards a greater goal of brining the nation together (trickle down?), but I suppose I just think that the "laissez faire" attitude might be more benificial in accomplishing this. Anyway, I just thought I would throw out those ideas, not to critize your points but just to bounce off them, ya know.