44). In fulfillment of this need, the pure view of liberalism that was explained earlier was highly effective as a remedy (Miller, 1998, p.64). Under a liberal international order, free trade, political expression and human rights could be realized, in stark contrast to the deprivations and limitations of the wars that so recently threatened to destroy the entire planet.
Perhaps due to the liberalization of the international order, or in spite of it, the U.S.S.R. tightened restrictions on its economy and citizenry in the years after World War II, adding to the superpower's isolation and economic woes; eventually, however, this policy of separation and isolation eventually sealed the U.S.S.R.'s fate, and led to the collapse of Communism in the early 1990's. Because of this collapse, the international order was permitted to become even more liberal in nature, as millions of people were suddenly given the right to pursue their own economic, governmental, and daily living interests without government interference- classic liberalism personified (Foot, et al., 2003, p. 88).
Asia's Liberal Leanings
While the bulk of the literature discussed thus far focused on the world as a whole, and Europe in particular, the Asian continent also deserves discussion and analysis because of the key role that Asia has played in international order over the past several decades, and is sure to do so in more ways in the future.
Admittedly, much of the turn of Asia to the tenets of liberalism is based in economic motives. As the European Union has grown in political, and more importantly economic power, others have taken notice and desire to obtain the favor of the EU. In the case of Asia, the leaders of many of the Asian nations have realized that they will never make meaningful economic progress with any European nation if they refuse to improve upon their abysmal human rights, governmental, and environmental performance of the past. Therefore, there has been a push to improve in these areas, and as a result, a liberal mindset has prevailed in many parts of Asia, regardless of the motive for the move itself (Kausikan, 1993, p.26).
Liberal Proliferation in Light of Global Terrorism
Evidence also exists to show an increasing liberal influence in international order as a result of global terrorism, amplified to a large extent by the events of September 11, 2001, which showed that perhaps the United States was exerting too much influence and oppressing others, going against the liberal rulebook. As the U.S. has responded to September 11, in many cases through unwarranted military actions against nations that appear to have had no hand in the treachery, the international community has embraced liberalism in opposition to official American foreign policy, choosing instead to defend the human rights of the citizens of the nations invaded by the American military, and insisting that these nations be allowed to wrest themselves from the grip of American oppression and be allowed to fulfill their own destinies (Beeson, et al., 2003, p. 340). This international controversy has brought the liberal nature of the international order onto center stage.
The International Order, Justice and Freedom
All of the research and discussion of the amount of liberal presence in the international order comes down to questions of justice and freedom for the individual, for the mass of individuals is the essential fabric of the international...
Because of the progression of world events, and the constant possibility of the overthrow of the fundamental freedoms of individuals, there has been an overwhelming support of liberalism in the international order as a whole (Foot, et al., 2003, p. 155). This liberalism has grown to encompass politics, economics, and human rights, showing that the international order has in fact become an increasingly liberal one.
Chapter 3
SUMMARY
In short, it is clear from the research and analysis, accompanied by the information gathered from secondary sources such as the classroom experience, that the international order is an increasingly liberal one; however, the research has also indicated that the definition of what is being referred to as liberal demands clarification in the conclusion portion of this paper in order to fully validate the answer to the central question that has formed this paper itself.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the researcher first reasserts that the international order is an increasingly liberal one. However, it must also be stated once again in conclusion that that the liberalization of the international order that has grown in recent years is based on the classic liberal model of freedom, individual rights, fair government, and prosperity. For some reason, there are those who oppose liberalism because they believe that the actual nature of liberalism is a form of anarchy whereby the individual recklessly pursues gratification with little regard for others or even the consequences of their actions in the pursuit of such pleasures. Likewise, however, the individuals who practice the deviated form of liberalism, which is in fact inauthentic, seem to be the most visible and vocal, giving the general population that their brand of liberalism is what all liberals embrace, and therefore, all liberals are looked upon with disdain.
In closing, the researcher would like to make it abundantly clear that pure liberalism is what the world is embracing, and what needs to continue for the good of the international order, given the perilous nature of the modern world.
Bibliography
Beeson, M., & Bellamy, a.J. (2003). Globalisation, Security and International Order after 11 September. The Australian Journal of Politics and History, 49(3), 339+.
Conquest, R. (1999, February). Liberals & Totalitarianism. New Criterion, 17, 4.
Cumings, B. (2000, May 8). FREE-MARKET LIBERALISM IS NOW PROCLAIMED a UNIVERSAL MODEL for SUCCESS, but THIS BELIEF IS BASED on a PARTIAL and LIMITED WORLDVIEW: The American Ascendancy Imposing a New World Order. The Nation, 270, 13.
Foot, R., Gaddis, J., & Hurrell, a. (Eds.). (2003). Order and Justice in International Relations. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Ignatieef, M., Taylor, C., & Enright, M. (2003, Summer). Being a Liberal. Queen's Quarterly, 110, 257+.
Kagan, R. (1999, April). History Repeating Itself: Liberalism and Foreign Policy. New Criterion, 17, 4.
Kausikan, B. (1993, Fall). Asia's Different Standard. Foreign Policy 24+.
Miller, L.H. (1998). Values and Power in International Politics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Porter, T. (2002). Technology, Governance and Political Conflict in International Industries. London: Routledge.
Robbins, L. (1937). Economic Planning and International Order. London: Macmillan.
