20th Century: The Cold War and Globalization
During the Second World War, Britain and America were allies of Russia, fighting together against Germany. After the war, they became enemies. The United States and the Soviet Union emerged from World War II as the world’s two superpowers. No other countries were equal to them in military power or political influence. Differences in political and social beliefs and policies soon pulled the two superpowers apart and led to a struggle between them known as the cold war.
Historians have thought about the cold war first in terms of Russian blame then later the revisionists talk of U.S. blame and now we tend to focus on the cold war as a social, and political clash of ideas. It is the ideas that have motivated the event we call the cold war.
After Hiroshima, and particularly after 1949 when then Russian scientist Kurchatov developed the atomic bomb, politicians realized that the bomb would change international politics. In the cold war, each superpower sought world influence by means short of total war. This was because the possibility of nuclear war made the costs of a hot war too high. Another ‘hot war’ would kill all humankind. War would be MAD (mutually assured destruction).
So the USA (along with its allies) and Soviet Russia stopped short of war. They didn’t declare war. But they did everything to oppose each other short of war. The weapons used in the cold war included the threat of force, the use of propaganda, and the sending of military and economic aid to weaker nations. It was called the ‘cold war’. It lasted until 1989 and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Source: adapted from John D Clare
The political event we call the cold war had two rivals: East vs West or Capitalism vs Communism or the USA vs the USSR but the impact of this event was global. Other nations were impacted by the cold war often in very significant ways that altered the shape and fortunes of these nations.
Historians have thought about the cold war first in terms of Russian blame then later the revisionists talk of U.S. blame and now we tend to focus on the cold war as a social, and political clash of ideas. It is the ideas that have motivated the event we call the cold war.
After Hiroshima, and particularly after 1949 when then Russian scientist Kurchatov developed the atomic bomb, politicians realized that the bomb would change international politics. In the cold war, each superpower sought world influence by means short of total war. This was because the possibility of nuclear war made the costs of a hot war too high. Another ‘hot war’ would kill all humankind. War would be MAD (mutually assured destruction).
So the USA (along with its allies) and Soviet Russia stopped short of war. They didn’t declare war. But they did everything to oppose each other short of war. The weapons used in the cold war included the threat of force, the use of propaganda, and the sending of military and economic aid to weaker nations. It was called the ‘cold war’. It lasted until 1989 and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Source: adapted from John D Clare
The political event we call the cold war had two rivals: East vs West or Capitalism vs Communism or the USA vs the USSR but the impact of this event was global. Other nations were impacted by the cold war often in very significant ways that altered the shape and fortunes of these nations.
What is 'Globalization'?
Globalization represents the global integration of international trade, investment, information technology and cultures. Government policies designed to open economies domestically and internationally to boost development in poorer countries and raise standards of living for their people are what drive globalization. However, these policies have created an international free market that has mainly benefited multinational corporations in the Western world to the detriment of smaller businesses, cultures and common people.
Globalization represents the global integration of international trade, investment, information technology and cultures. Government policies designed to open economies domestically and internationally to boost development in poorer countries and raise standards of living for their people are what drive globalization. However, these policies have created an international free market that has mainly benefited multinational corporations in the Western world to the detriment of smaller businesses, cultures and common people.
Links to help you along the way:
Statement of Inquiry:
Globalization has consequences on human development, economic development, and environmental sustainability.
Globalization has consequences on human development, economic development, and environmental sustainability.
Liberal Democracy
… we see the rise of a disturbing phenomenon in international life -- illiberal democracy. It has been difficult to recognize this problem because for almost a century in the West, democracy has meant liberal democracy -- a political system marked not only by free and fair elections, but also by the rule of law, a separation of powers, and the protection of basic liberties of speech, assembly, religion, and property.In fact, this latter bundle of freedoms -- what might be termed constitutional liberalism -- is theoretically different and historically distinct from democracy. As the political scientist Philippe Schmitter has pointed out, "Liberalism, either as a conception of political liberty, or as a doctrine about economic policy, may have coincided with the rise of democracy. But it has never been immutably or unambiguously linked to its practice." Today the two strands of liberal democracy, interwoven in the Western political fabric, are coming apart in the rest of the world. Democracy is flourishing; constitutional liberalism is not.
- The Illiberal Democracy by Fareed Zakaria
… we see the rise of a disturbing phenomenon in international life -- illiberal democracy. It has been difficult to recognize this problem because for almost a century in the West, democracy has meant liberal democracy -- a political system marked not only by free and fair elections, but also by the rule of law, a separation of powers, and the protection of basic liberties of speech, assembly, religion, and property.In fact, this latter bundle of freedoms -- what might be termed constitutional liberalism -- is theoretically different and historically distinct from democracy. As the political scientist Philippe Schmitter has pointed out, "Liberalism, either as a conception of political liberty, or as a doctrine about economic policy, may have coincided with the rise of democracy. But it has never been immutably or unambiguously linked to its practice." Today the two strands of liberal democracy, interwoven in the Western political fabric, are coming apart in the rest of the world. Democracy is flourishing; constitutional liberalism is not.
- The Illiberal Democracy by Fareed Zakaria