| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "DEVELOPMENT LIBERALISM": |
|
|
The Development of Liberalism, 2008.
This paper discusses the development of liberalism as a political philosophy.
1,425 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that liberalism emerged as a political philosophy during the Enlightenment era in Europe and was espoused by political philosophers such as John Locke. The paper defines liberalism as a political ideology based upon representative government and individual rights. The paper explains that it emphasizes strong support for a broad interpretation of civil liberties, for freedom of expression, religious toleration, the separation of church and state and for widespread popular participation in the political process. The paper reveals that for three hundred years liberalism has attempted to establish itself as a transcendent political philosophy in opposition to autocratic and totalitarian political ideologies. The paper concludes that it may ultimately fall to the very ideology it replaced; autocratic theocracy.
From the Paper
"Understanding liberalism is important because it has been a prevailing political philosophy in the Western world for more than two centuries. It is also important to emphasize that, "liberalism is not one simple, undifferentiated doctrine. As with other doctrines or ideologies, there are varieties of liberalism." (Sally) For example, "all liberals agree on the primacy of individual freedom and individual choice, which distinguishes liberalism from socialism and nationalism. But some liberals argue in favor of these core values by means of highly abstract reasoning." (Sally)"
| |
|
Liberalism and Neo-liberalism, 2005.
This paper discusses theories of liberalism and neo-liberalism in international politics.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 4 sources, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this essay, the writer examines theories of liberalism and neo-liberalism in international politics. The writer discusses neo-liberalism as based in liberal democracy. The writer identifies limits of both theories. Further, the writer discusses major problems and limitations with each theory.
From the Paper
"According to sociologists, market-based economic policies have been institutionalized as a nearly global policy paradigm embodying first liberalism and later neo-liberalism. The purpose of this report is to discuss the theories of liberalism and neo-liberalism in studying international politics and to identify the limitations of these approaches. All such theories in the context of international relations are designed to solve the problems and puzzles of state behavior by offering a causal account of a particular outcome or pattern of behavior in ... "
| |
|
Liberalism, Neo-Liberalism, and International Politics, 2005.
An overview of the relationship between liberal and neo-liberal theories and international politics.
861 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
According to sociologists, since the 1970s, market-based economic policies have been institutionalized as a nearly global policy paradigm embodying first, liberalism, and later, neo-liberalism. The purpose of this report is to discuss the theories of liberalism and neo-liberalism in studying international politics and to identify the limitations of these approaches.
From the Paper
"In neoliberalism, which developed in the final decades of the twentieth century, a set of economic principles became part of the accepted framework for thinking about and acting upon both the economy and the relations of states to one another. Neoliberalism assumed that a positive outcome both economically and politically would be generated through a wave of reforms ? privatizations, dismantling of social welfare programs, the retreat of the state from economic regulation, tax cuts, and the opening of national boundaries."
| |
|
?Liberated Parents, Liberated Children?, 2004.
A review of the parenting book, "Liberated Parents, Liberated Children: Your Guide to a Happier Family", by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish.
1,460 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how authors Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish wrote their counter-cultural book, "Liberated Parents, Liberated Children: Your Guide to a Happier Family", regarding tips and tactics for parents to use as they raised children before the term ?counter-cultural? had become politically correct. It looks at how, in 1974, when the majority of children were being raised under the questionable, permissive advice of Dr. Spock, these authors focused on another aspect of child rearing. It looks at how they were significantly influenced by child psychologist Haim Ginott ,who believed that it was the emotional well-being of the child that would guide his actions.
From the Paper
"This differentiation between giving of ourselves to our children, and giving ourselves over to our children is the delicate line which Mazlish and Faber walk throughout their book as they discuss skills for parents to learn to build emotionally balanced and self-secure children. The approach which encourages parents to remain in their authority role in the child?s life, as well as equips the parent to connect with the child?s feeling is the element of this book which sets it apart from other works. Dr. Spock taught parents to reason with their children rather than correct them. By doing so, the well intentioned doctor instructed parents to abdicate an important role in their children?s development, which is the role of authority to which the child is accountable."
| |
|
?Liberated Parents, Liberated Children?, 2004.
A review of the book, "Liberated Parents, Liberated Children: Your Guide to a Happier Family", by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish.
1,108 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 0 sources, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the book, "Liberated Parents, Liberated Children: Your Guide to a Happier Family", by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish, which discusses their experiences attending a series of parent workshops given by child psychologist, Dr. Ginott. It looks at how its approach to parenting appears to be very simplistic in nature: do not control your children, but rather respect them for their individuality and uniqueness. It discusses how punishment is not an effective tool for establishing a trusting relationship, nor is a power trip, or being too protective or defensive. It shows how an adversarial relationship with a child will normally escalate or deteriorate as he/she gets older and becomes more defensive and less intimidated.
From the Paper
"Similarly, a child?s autonomy need not threaten a parent. Dr. Ginott saids, ?We help most by not helping.? How many parents are afraid of what will happen if their children fail? If their school project is not perfect or if their hair is sticking up or they wear clothes that are wrinkled? The problem is that the parents? self-esteem is so wrapped up in their children?s success or failure that it is taken as a personal affront. If the son a daughter does not make the team or get invited to a party, it is as if the parent did not make the grade. The child who is better prepared for the future is the one who has to remember to return his/her books to the library, finish a homework assignment or even makes the same mistake over again."
| |
|
Argentina and Neo-liberalism, 2008.
This paper explores the effects of neo-liberal policies on Argentinean human development.
2,769 words (approx. 11.1 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper argues that although governmental incompetence has contributed to its problems, Argentina's present impoverishment and dependence is very much a product of neo-liberal policies foisted upon the country by powerful international actors like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. The paper provides an overview of Argentinean domestic policy, notes the neo-liberal agenda and impact of the World Bank and IMF and illustrates the consequences flowing from neo-liberal policies made all the more powerful by compelling global phenomena. The paper shows how while neo-liberalism is certainly not all bad, it does discourage the sort of internal development a poor and weakened nation like Argentina desperately needs.
From the Paper
"Before proceeding too far, it is necessary to provide some background information on the country of Argentina; this background, needless to say, can offer a great deal of insight into why Argentina's current predicament is as bad as it is. For most of the twentieth century, Argentina's economy has been characterized by stagnation and by recession; indeed, since the middle 1970s, per capita income has tumbled and (by the middle 1990s) was less than that of relatively poor nations such as Chile and Malaysia. Additionally, the emigration of Argentineans seeking a better life has emerged as a pressing concern in recent years. To all of this must be added the fact that Argentina's interior - which comprises roughly 70 percent of the nation's land and, as of roughly a decade ago, comprised just under a third of its population - has been chronically poor since at least the 1930s (Sawers, 3-4)."
| |
|
Liberalism: Past and Present, 2004.
Examines a 1764 pamphlet on the ideas of liberalism and shows how these ideas differ from the concept of liberalism today.
2,800 words (approx. 11.2 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Liberalism has always encompassed the basic premise that individuals are fundamentally free. The political concept of liberalism has gone through some changes over the centuries, but the philosophical concept of liberalism has remained mostly unaltered. The paper shows that the ways in which liberal ideas were put into practice during the infancy of American civilization are illustrated through a widely acclaimed pamphlet written by Governor Stephen Hopkins and published by William Goddard, entitled ?The Rights of Colonies Examined.? This pamphlet was put into publication on December 22, 1764, and consecutive editions ran in 1765 and 1766. The paper explains that the pamphlet was written in response to the imposed Revenue Act of 1764, as well as a proposed Stamp Act, which would have only caused undue economic burdens on the American colonies. The paper shows, therefore, that the liberalism expressed at this point of history is different from contemporary liberalism, both politically and practically.
From the Paper
"The pamphlet argued that the equal privileges and rights held by those in America are held as ?inherent indefeasible rights?, and as free-born subjects, are naturally entitled to rights outlined in the British Constitution. However, the author suggested that the liberty situation among the American colonies seems to be changing for the worst. It was explained how the British ministry, for some unknown reason, had passed an act that limited and hindered trade of the American colonies, and also resolved that taxes, including a duty on stamps, was necessary. This was seen as undermining the principles of liberty the colonies, as well as the British constitution, were built upon."
| |
|
Economic Development Strategies in South America, 2002.
Examines economic strategies of structuralism, neo-liberalism and Marxism and how they are applied to three countries in South America.
1,606 words (approx. 6.4 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 52.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Since World War II developing countries in South America have been provided with the option of adopting one of three different economic development strategies-- structuralism, neo-liberalism, and Marxism. This essay examines the economic and political results engendered by each approach and determines what these results suggest for future economic policy choices in the region. Three countries lend themselves to this analysis. Cuba, since the overthrow of the Batista regime and the establishment of Castro's Marxist government, has pursued economic development along Marxist lines. In Argentina a structuralist economic order under Juan Peron gave way to a neo-liberalist orientation. In Chile, a neo-liberal experiment between 1974 and 1990 took place and this experiment has led to structural change in the national economy.
From the Paper
"Under Raul Alfonsin and the Radical Party, efforts to reconcile democratization with rapid development and social justice were largely frustrated by a succession of failed stabilization plans (Smith, 1991). A catastrophic economic collapse led to a convincing victory by Peronist Carlos Menem in the May 1989 presidential contest. This ushered in a wave of neoliberal, free market reforms designed to restructure the Argentine economy along the lines of a so-called Washington Consensus (Smith, 1999). In essence, Menem rejected the structuralist, populist, and statist postulates defended by Peronism since the 1940s."
| |
|
Economic Development and Trade, 2001.
An examination of the needs of developing countries to move towards international trade and globalization in order to keep up with world trends.
4,205 words (approx. 16.8 pages), 25 sources, APA, $ 112.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how economic development of any country promotes the trade and business and how free trade and liberalization in trade policies, on behalf of the governments, help the businesses to flourish and effectively compete in the world market. The writer covers the issues related to the economic development of the developing nations and discusses the aspects that have caused hindrance in the economic development of these countries. Finally the paper cites the example of a developing country (India) and discusses how liberalization in trade has helped it in making remarkable achievements with respect to economic growth and to bring improvements in its industry and trade.
From the Paper
"In an era of increased globalization and advancements in technology, it has become increasingly important for all of the nations of the world to keep bringing improvements in their economic infrastructure and to expand their businesses on the global scale. It has been observed that without a reasonable level of economic development any country cannot gain a competitive position in the world market. This is the dilemma faced by most of the developed nations of the world."
| |
|
Karl Marx and His Challenge of Liberalism, 2008.
An examination of Karl Marx's challenge to liberalism in "The Communist Manifesto."
1,831 words (approx. 7.3 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Karl Marx challenged liberalism in works such as "The Communist Manifesto", in which he condemned capitalism and predicted that the exploited working classes of capitalistic societies would become alienated and overthrow the system of capitalism. The paper explains that Marx was convinced that once liberalism was discredited and capitalism was overthrown, there would be a brief period of rule by the dictatorship of the proletariat and then the classless society of communism would emerge. The paper also discusses how Marx believed that working class Germans should be the chief focus of his revolutionary efforts because the political consciousness of the proletariat in Germany was more developed than in any other country in Europe. The paper then examines liberalism and its impact on society, in order to fully analyze Marx's challenges to liberalism.
From the Paper
"Marx believed that many political, economic, and social changes would be necessary in the aftermath of a proletarian revolution, for in his view, the only way the proletariat could free itself from exploitation was to abolish capitalism. In achieving this goal, the proletariat would have to destroy every remnant of bourgeois liberal culture because this culture perpetuated their misery. Family, religion, the worship of personalities, morality, and the legal system would all have to be abolished. According to Marx, the result of this abolishment would be "an association in which the free development of each is the condition for the development of all.""
| |
|
1960s Liberalism, 2007.
A discussion on liberalism in the 1960s, focusing on the Civil Rights Movement.
2,100 words (approx. 8.4 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines how modern liberalism reached a peak in the 1960s United States, when the Great Society program, initiated by President Johnson, resulted in a number of significant reforms. The paper discusses these reforms, particularly in the areas of civil rights and social welfare. The paper analyzes how, since the mid-1970s, however, there has been a definitive move away from liberalism and towards conservatism in the American society. The essay discusses reasons for this change.
Outline:
Introduction
The Philosophy of the 1960s' Liberalism & its Objectives
Accomplishments of 1960s Liberalism
Reasons for the Conservative Backlash
Conclusion
References
From the Paper
"In the recent history of the United States, liberalism had its heyday in the 1960s when the Civil Rights Movement and feelings against social injustice in the American society culminated in the 'Great Society' program of LBJ that set the ambitious goals of eliminating poverty and racial injustice by launching major initiatives in the areas of education, health, urban problems, transportation, consumer protection, and the environment. Other spin-offs of the liberal era were the flowering of movement for Women's Liberation and the gay rights. From the mid-seventies onward, however, liberalism has gradually been overshadowed by a growing conservative tide in the US society to an extent that many observers have pronounced it 'dead and buried.'"
| |
|
The Core of Liberalism: An Analysis of Liberty, 2006.
A discussion on John Stuart Mill's views and beliefs on liberalism.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Liberalism arose in Europe in the seventeenth century in the midst of extreme, protracted ethnic, religious and class conflict. For more than three hundred years, liberalism has attempted to establish itself as guiding force in human society despite the political and economic resistance imposed by self-interested agendas and identities. Staunch defenders of liberty such as John Stuart Mill believed that individual liberty is the foundational core of liberalism, and is the driving force behind the diverse development of humanity. This paper discusses Mill's notion of individual liberty and liberalism, which held that liberty is of fundamental importance because it enables each individual to seek out and explore his or her own individual path in life.
| |
|
American Liberalism, 2002.
Examines idea of Liberalism in American politics from 1776 to 1850 which stemmed from Federalist views and ultimately contributed partially to the Civil War.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Liberalism in America has both waxed and waned, but by the 1850's the idea of a large central government dictating the behavior of states and individuals was abhorrent to at least 50% of the states. When America began, while there was one voice for the creation of an independent nation, there were two distinct voices claiming legitimacy for the form which that new nation would take. The Republicans believed that the best form was an essentially toothless national government with very limited powers other than those of creating laws, forming the military, managing money and negotiating treaties. The Federalists believed that a strong central government with broad powers that would supercede states' rights was the proper course. Liberalism emerged from the Federalist view - the idea that the Federal Government could and should, provide for an individual-level of influence and benefit. Liberalism, then, was the politics of managing the lives of the citizens in the manner that the central government perceived would provide the greatest benefit. This concept has been part of the American political scene since then, in various forms, but while it was a movement in the first 75-years of the nation's history, a central distrust of large centralized governments stemming from the anti-English and anti-Monarchy sentiments. Liberalism was, in part, cause for the Civil War.
| |
|
Liberalism vs. Marxism, 2005.
This paper discusses theoretical differences between Liberalism and Marxism on the question of state formation, its function and especially its future, the withering away of the "state".
4,625 words (approx. 18.5 pages), 19 sources, APA, $ 119.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the Marxist theory of the state is not only consistent with the understanding of society but also consistent with the historical facts, which reveals that the state is exploitative and infused with acute class bias, serving a particular end. The author points out that Liberalism falls short because it is an effort of the ruling class to replace the truth with lies and hide unpleasantness by portraying the state to be a need of society when it is really the need of only a certain class. The paper concludes that the reality of the state is only understood when it is analyzed through the lens of history, which is what Marxism does; a stateless society is not a fairy tale but a reality that existed in the past and will in the future, when it no longer serves one class. Chart. Many quotes.
Table of Contents
Liberalism
Marxism
Liberalism and the Development of the Social Contract Theory:
How does the State Wither Away According to Marx?
From the Paper
"Having turned the whole relation as it was understood upside down, Marx put forth that the civil society is "the real bedrock, real stage of history" . The state, envisioned to be a glorious classless entity, is in reality a political formation resulting from class struggles that are continuously developing in the heart of civil society. It is the "organ of a given system of production based upon a predominant form of property ownership, which invests the state with a specific class bias" . Thus, it is really the instrument, the organized political expression of the ruling economic class in the economy. Consequently, Marxism asserts that it is not the final stage in the process of human evolution or "an absolute and eternal being" , but a part of a stage bound to disappear as historical conditions change."
| |
|
Fundamentalism as a Response to Liberalism, 2006.
This paper compares and contrasts fundamentalism and liberalism.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 4 sources, $ 115.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper, based on Macedo, refers to Rorty and others, to explain present antipathy between liberalism and fundamentalism. The writer points out that liberalism has usually found its solution in all matters of religion in toleration, but fails to recognize that liberalism represents a kind of fundamentalism. The writer makes reference to Fromm and uses an example from Martin Luther King Jr. Further, the writer describes kinds of fundamentalism and what they may indicate of liberalism's failings.
From the Paper
"Liberalism has results other than the growing freedom or happiness posited by Utilitarian and later thought. Fundamentalism, as discussed by Macedo among others, indicates liberalism's failings when approaching human anxieties that may be expressed in a 'return to the past' as held up by fundamentalism. Macedo states that religious toleration, at first, does not seem to have much to do with contemporary political philosophy as it expects a firm separation of the religious and the secular. However, large questions facing political philosophy in the present happen to have to do with matters of not just religion but religious fundamentalism."
|
|
|
