Realists and Liberalists Views

Liberalists and Realists World Views Liberalists and realists exhaust comp permitely different views on the world stage. Liberalists views are based on liberty and equality mend Realists views are based on security and relationships with great powers. Liberalists believe that an inter res publicaal society can induce together to resolve problems. This involves trade between all nations and warfare would end so that everyone could live in peace and help for each one other(a) step to the fore. Liberalists also believe that war should completely occur when it is an tyrannical emergency and not clean to acquire new land or to improve their economy.The realists on the other hand believe that war is inevitable and that the best way of avoiding war is to be strong and let your enemies know that you are ready for anything. Realists believe that if we rely on crusade to resolve war that postal code will ever get resolved. After World War Two, realists views were favored by the majo rity of the world. Realists argued that in world politics in that respect is no g all overnment to set rules or protect states, so that each state must look after its own because you cannot always rely on other states for help. I believe that in that location has to be a happy medium that the liberalists and the realists can come too.Why cant we all work together to provide security for the whole world. There is no reason why our world has to be qualifying to war all the time over territory or because we puzzle to help an ally. War neer really solves anything it usually just leads to more violence and more problems. I say this because even when war sometimes does solve a problem between two nations those nations batch will never be able to live the same way. The consequences of war can be unconscionable people can lose their homes, schools can be destroyed, peoples food sources can be cut off, and ultimately people can lose their whole families due to war.The nations are not only financially weaker save now you have ruined peoples lives on top of it. both(prenominal) views can be favored at any time in the world this depends on what is going on in the world. Liberalism is obviously going to be favored if the whole world was at peace. The reason I say this because if there were no wars going on people would not be so worried about security and power of their nation. They wouldnt have to side with the realists view of security because there is no threat to their nation. While on the other hand if there are wars going on around the world people are going to favor realists iews because they are afraid of what could happen without a strong sufficient military to protect them. I cannot blame the realists views on security because there is a lot of violence in the world and if you do not have a strong enough military tragedies could happen to your nation. I feel that the only reason why Realists views still remain is because there are so many worries in th e world. There is always going to be conflict over new global challenges such as worry of HIV, climate change, nuclear weapons and even cyber-attacks.We will never be able to eliminate all of the global challenges that arise but I gullt see why there has to be so much violence in the world. Every sidereal day in the news more and more innocent people die for no reason whether its in the United States or Cairo it doesnt matter, the violence needs to stop. It is senseless to have nations rash billions of dollars down the drain every year over the dumbest things. Nations should keep their cash that they get from taxes and help out their own nation and work to eliminate internal problems instead of always focusing on out-of-door problems.Who cares if other nations want to blow themselves up let them work out their own problems, other nations dont need to jump in and make the problem worse. The only thing that comes out of war and violence is death and death to me doesnt solve any problems. If it were up to me every nation would have to drop their weapons and talk there problems out. The problem with this though is violence has been in the history of every nation at some point, so everyone just knows violence as a way to solve a problem.I am not saying that we should never again raise a weapon to protect ourselves but we cannot always rely on violence to solve our problems it is just a huge waste of money and just creates a higher death toll. The thing is people think that when two nations go to war over a certain issue that the outcome will result in a colonization of that issue but that is not always true it usually ends in a temporary contract but then sometime in the near future that issue will rise again whether it is between the same countries or different ones.All nations need to work together to resolve world problems so that those problems will not have to arise again. We should not have to use violence to deal with our issues we should just simpl y talk it out and combine our ideas to have a resolution for that problem. I know that it is not that easy to do, but we can talk things out without people dying and spending billions on pointless firearms. Yes, talking out our problems may take a while till we can agree on a resolution but war isnt exactly a fast resolution either.