Remi Blog post 1
Remi Adefioye
POLS 170 Blog 1
From class and the readings, it is clear that there are many layers to power in international politics and they can be used in various ways. The two forms that stand out to me are military and soft power.
Military and weapon strength is one of the most common ways of thinking about power in general. For example, the current taboo of nuclear weapons in our society today is a reflection of the constant struggle for military power across the world. As discussed in class, Mearsheimer strongly supports having a strong military because he believes military power is all that a nation needs to have control. Morgenthau on the other hand thinks that power can be anything as long as it maintains control over its opposition. Particularly in the US, many argue that the large funding to the military should be used in other areas of society, while others believe that the US must remain a military superpower. Clearly, this is a polarized debate amongst citizens however the current standing is likely to never change
Soft power is the second form of power that merits highlighting. This is an underrated form of power that allows states to gain control and influence over other states without coercion. For example, the US has vast amounts of soft power due to its consumption of media, and culture. This form of power brings major economic advantages to the state and allows them to lead by example.
Overall the debate on power is very deep and complex and I am interested in learning the forms of power that different states prioritize in their leadership. In my opinion, every state should have a mixture of both military/coercive power and soft power to be truly untouchable. With this, a state will be able to affect and shape the behaviors of other states. States will either submit to you out of fear or submit to you out of attraction.
I agree with the points of soft power and influence that the US has, especially with modern media. I think that next time there should be an expansion on this and more of how the US soft power has influenced society with specific events. Personally, I believe that power should come from attraction rather than fear. Different countries that attempt to use fear as power tend to end up with rebellions from their citizens or other countries having to intervene.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your distinctions made between hard and soft power. Growing up, at least where I was from, power was often viewed the same as Mearsheimer, because the country with the largest army and most advanced military has the most power of any country. Whether it is a reflection of the type of militaristic-glorifying society of the United States or not, I am not sure, but hard power is typically seen as the crowning qualification when it comes to power rankings. I believe that going off of solely this view of power is near-sighted and basic, as soft power is often more effective in the pursuit of an actor’s material interests without causing the devastation caused by large scale military engagement, which is an endeavor that is to be desired. Power is not purely hard or soft, but a complex mix of the two, that is much more difficult to rank than just solely based on hard power, which is just an easy way out for ranking.
ReplyDelete