1,523
edits
Changes
→Another definition of liberal -2
::Finding acceptable, agreeable solutions, this at its core should be the diplomats mission. Trying to force an issue is "realism", as I've come to understand it the way you have explained. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 00:24, 31 August 2007 (EDT)
::Finding acceptable, agreeable solutions, this at its core should be the diplomats mission. Trying to force an issue is "realism", as I've come to understand it the way you have explained. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 00:24, 31 August 2007 (EDT)
:::My goal isn't to force this "convoluted" meaning, and I did fully intent to write more articles which utilized the meaning. However, I didn't want to put tons of effort into writing those articles before I found out whether or not the foundation for them was going to be there. So, instead of writing about IR/IA/IP and leaving redlinks to the fundamentals, I wanted to build from the ground up.
:::As for systemization, this seems to be the difference of opinion between social scientists (i.e. political scientists) and historians, which I mentioned above (way, way, way above :p). I find it most useful to define the term "liberal" then look for the liberalness of modern institutions (if that makes sense). Certainly, even if liberalism is in "disarray" (which I'm not sure I agree with), there ''are'' principals of liberalism in most if not all international institutions. (It's also not accurate to say that "nobody" agrees on the definition; it is used identically in every work I've ever found in international politics). So instead of saying that no liberal institutions exist, we explain, using a common definition, the "liberal" and "realist" actions of any actor.
:::To draw an analogy to American politics, there are very few "liberals", "conservatives" and "libertarians" in America, if we use the complete definition of each of those words. However, there are many people with liberal, conservative and libertarian traits. This isn't to say that everyone is moderate, just that humans are too complex to ever fit a perfect definition. In order to function at all in a discussion of American politics (and the analogical international politics) we have to define the "perfect" value, then discuss if and how an actor deviates. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 17:12, 31 August 2007 (EDT)
==pedophile Peacekeepers and the UN as a "liberal organization"==
==pedophile Peacekeepers and the UN as a "liberal organization"==