PLS 220 Chapter 4 - Chapter 4 Summary PLS 220 I The Notion of a System A system is an assemblage of units objects or parts united by some form of

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Chapter 4 Summary - PLS 220 I. The Notion of a System A system is an assemblage of units, objects, or parts united by some form of regular interaction. In the 1950s, the behavioral revolution in the social sciences and growing acceptance of political realism in international relations led scholars to conceptualize international politics as a system, using the language of systems theory. II. The International System According to Realists All realists characterize the international system as anarchic. No authority exists above the state, which is sovereign. Each state must therefore look out for its own interests above all. Polarity: system polarity refers to the number of blocs of states that exert power in the international system. There are three types of polarity: 1. Multipolarity: if there are a number of influential actors in the international system, a balance-of-power or multipolar system is formed. In a balance-of-power system, the essential norms of the system are clear to each of the state actors. In classical balance of power, the actors are exclusively states and there should be at least five of them. If an actor does not follow these norms, the balance-of-power system may become unstable. When alliances are formed, they are formed for a specific purpose, have a short duration, and shift according to advantage rather than ideology. 2. Bipolarity: in the bipolar system of the Cold War, each of the blocs (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, and the Warsaw Pact) sought to negotiate rather than fight, to fight minor wars rather than major ones, and to fight major wars rather than fail to eliminate the rival bloc. Alliances tend to be long term, based on relatively permanent, not shifting, interests. In a tight bipolar system, international organizations either do not develop or are ineffective. In a looser system, international organizations may develop primarily to mediate between the two blocs. 2. Hegemony: one state that commands influence in the international system. Immediately after the Gulf War in 1991, many states grew concerned that the international system had become unipolar, with no effective counterweight to the power of the United States. System Management and Stability: Realists do not agree among themselves on how polarity matters. 1. Bipolar systems are very difficult to regulate formally, since neither uncommitted states nor international organizations are able to direct the behavior of either of the two blocs. Informal regulation may be easier. 2. Kenneth Waltz argues that the bipolar system is the most stable structure in the long run because there is a clear difference in the amount of power held by the two poles as compared to that held by the rest of the state actors. 3.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 01/20/2012 for the course PLS 220 taught by Professor Masters,d during the Spring '08 term at University of North Carolina Wilmington.

Page1 / 4

PLS 220 Chapter 4 - Chapter 4 Summary PLS 220 I The Notion of a System A system is an assemblage of units objects or parts united by some form of

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online