Title With Picture Layout

Realism,internationalism,universalismSubtitle

NOTE: Want a different image on this slide? Select the picture and delete it. Now click the Pictures icon in the placeholder to insert your own image.1

Learning Outcomes:At the conclusion of discussions, students are expected to:Learn the three traditions of thought in understanding international relations/politicsDistinguish the differences between the three traditions of thought in International relationsAnalyze the degree of sovereignty of states in relations to the three traditions of thought in IRUnderstanding World PoliticsHedley BullBull, speaks of three traditions of thought in understanding the problem of international order. These are the Realist tradition, Internationalist tradition, and Universalist tradition.

3

What are the Differences?The Realist traditionIt sees the State in a tradition of anarchy, with little to constrain them except the power of other states.

The Internationalist traditionIt sees the international relations as taking place within a society of states: states are the primary actors but they are bound by this societys rules of behavior.

The Universalist traditionIt represents people directly as individuals rather than through states.REALISMRealists believe that the ultimate arbiter of outcomes in International relations is Power.

They view states as the most powerful in international settings, because states control most of the planets military power, have an ability to tax that is not shared by any other institution, and are the issuers of worlds currencies.While International Organizations share none of the features. IOs militarily dependent on states to enforce their rules. Having no ability to tax, they depend on states to fund them. Having no territory, they depend on states to host them. As such, IOs can only really succeed when backed by powerful states.REALISMRealists believe that it makes little sense to focus attention on IOs, because IOs reflect the existing balance of power and the interests of powerful states.

IOs are better understood as tools in the power struggle of states, than as independent actors or independent effects.InternationalistIt roots in the study of international law rather than in the study of power and politics.It sees states in the international society as somewhat analogous to people in a domestic society. Domestic society works because people follow most of its rules all the time. Similarly, states in the international level follow international laws most of the time.Following rules is observe not because of altruism, rather they observed International laws because they all benefit in a society that is ruled-governed and are willing to accept rules if rules binds also that of other members.With that, IOs become expression of rules that govern the international society. IOs are important because they regulate international relations.

Although IOs play important role in IR, states are still regarded as the primary actors in international relationsUniversalistThe Universalist traditions sees states as increasingly irrelevant in the face of a developing global society, instead Universalists adheres to the society of people rather than states.Universalists and Internationalists stood in common in a light scale sense as Internationalist look at states as actors in international relations while universalist look at people/population in international relations.In Universalist, IOs are more important as expressions of, and creators of, global civil society than they are as regulators of relations among states. Accordingly, IOs are studied as partial replacement for states rather than as mediators for states.Conclusions in UnderstandingRealism, Internationalism, & UniversalismRealist reinforces that idea that the sovereign state system is continuing much the same as always. States remain as the locus of power in international system. External & Internal sovereignty is expected to be as strong as ever both to large and small states.Internationalists responds to globalization idea, and it undermines the sovereignty of states. The greater the extent to which IOs makes rules that reflect global civil society, the less autonomy states have to make rules domestically that are incongruent to international norms.In internationalists, we see IOs, NGOs, TNCs and other representatives of global society begin to replace states as the legitimate representatives of the global citizenry.3. Universalism sees people as the source of sovereignty in the modern times, though it is a little bit similar to internationalism, yet we can see a meager difference as we study the political structure of EU.

AssignmentPresent the political organization of EU, emphasizing its three major political bodies such as the ff:European commissionEuropean ParliamentCouncil of Ministers.Who are the member states of EU.Present a diagram representing the relationship of EC, EP, & CM.Justify if EU falls under the principles of Universalism school of thought of IR.Guide questions:What is the process of selecting/appointing representatives for EC, EP, & CM?How many representatives from state for the EC, EP, & CM?To be submitted next meeting, July 1, 2015.Encoded in a short bond. The No. 5 of the assignment is expected to be drawn in a separate bond paper.Title and Content Layout with Chart12Two Content Layout with TableFirst bullet point hereSecond bullet point hereThird bullet point hereGroup 1Group 2Class 18295Class 27688Class 3849013Title and Content Layout with SmartArt14Picture with Caption Layout

Caption151617192021