Realism In Global Poverty

Global Poverty & Realism

Jinpeng Zhu

11/19
Global Poverty According to the World Bank (2015b), from the most recent estimates in 2012, 12.7% of the world's population (896 million people) lived at or below $1.90 a day. It was a decrease from 1990 which was at 37% (1.95 billion) and in 1981, at 44% (1.99 billion). Among regions, East Asia had the most decline in poverty from 80% in 1981 to 7.2% in 2012. In Sub-Saharan Africa, it stood at 42.6% in 2012 (World Bank, 2015b). East Asia and Pacific, South Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa have for the last few decades accounted for about 95% of global poverty. In 1990, East Asia had about half of the world poor, but this was dramatically reversed as Sub-Sahara now holds half of the world's
States rationally pursue our interests. Global poverty, as expressed in the view of realism, is a social outcome with which governments rationally pursue given the objective laws at its disposal. This rationality is based on the potential of choices made to maximize power. Global poverty, then, as a social problem is solved as against its capability to incur power into the political establishment. The concept of interest defined in terms of power. It assumes that the national interests of states are only defined in terms of acquiring & maintaining power. With the goal of power maximization, the concept of interest fully rely on power. When the world's poverty level was at a high during the middle of the century, interest on the problem can be viewed as also low. How would solving the poor give more power? But in the long run, as poverty levels were decreased, decisions made through international agencies and governments have to focus on reducing poverty. Politics, in a sense, found a source for increasing power if poverty is
But realism strictly resides in the propagation of power, not social development, which is a definite weakness. If governments pursue realism as a guideline, we can only expect a dictatorial government or a perverse communist regime to proliferate. Realism does not care about the social ills or the needs of its citizens since it is only looking for power. Using its political rhetoric as a smoke screen, a realist leader only mumble and not perform. With the case of poverty, we explained above the ideal behavior of realism and its probable impact in the course of years and years of poverty reduction efforts. If realism was at work, then global poverty reduction was not realism's point of concern. Governments may have just said "yes and yes" to the World Bank or the United Nations whenever assistance is asked for. Results may then just be an accident, or a spillover effect since realist politicians are only busier in maintaining and expanding