Conservative Vs Progressive Realism
What are the most important sources of disagreement between conservative and progressive realists with regard to Latin America? conservative 333-334 336-338
It is imperative to understand the differences in ideology when studying the concepts of United States foreign policy towards Latin America. Realistic goals and strategies must be created in order to reshape United States policy towards Latin America. In regards to Smith, the aspect of realism helps people understand how the world operates and how to establish they viable framework of policy (Smith, 2013 p.334). As of now, there are two versions of realism. The first version is conservative realism. What is conservative realism? According to Smith, these are the five basic premises. One, the international system is anarchical. Two, sovereign …show more content…
What is progressive realism? According to Smith, these are the premises. One, implicit boundaries on the notions of nation-states. Two, non-state actors and international organizations play significant roles. Three, state preferences, are the prime determinant of international behavior. Four, states do not necessarily compete with each other. Five, cooperation can yield mutual gains for participating states, even military power, is not always the most effective means to guarantee survival and security (Smith, 2013 p.336).
The conservative perspective contradicts with the idea of manifest destiny. Manifest destiny is the ideology of “God-given destiny”, otherwise known as the obligation the United States has to expand their influences throughout the world. However, progressive realism, in short, relates to the idea of spreading of democracy. The ideas of democracy in Latin America, should serve the interests of the United States. This would be done with encouragement and above-board forms of influence. The first above-board influence that comes to mind is, the gospel of democracy. According to Smith, the ideology of democracy was forcibly spread throughout Latin America
It is imperative to understand the differences in ideology when studying the concepts of United States foreign policy towards Latin America. Realistic goals and strategies must be created in order to reshape United States policy towards Latin America. In regards to Smith, the aspect of realism helps people understand how the world operates and how to establish they viable framework of policy (Smith, 2013 p.334). As of now, there are two versions of realism. The first version is conservative realism. What is conservative realism? According to Smith, these are the five basic premises. One, the international system is anarchical. Two, sovereign …show more content…
What is progressive realism? According to Smith, these are the premises. One, implicit boundaries on the notions of nation-states. Two, non-state actors and international organizations play significant roles. Three, state preferences, are the prime determinant of international behavior. Four, states do not necessarily compete with each other. Five, cooperation can yield mutual gains for participating states, even military power, is not always the most effective means to guarantee survival and security (Smith, 2013 p.336).
The conservative perspective contradicts with the idea of manifest destiny. Manifest destiny is the ideology of “God-given destiny”, otherwise known as the obligation the United States has to expand their influences throughout the world. However, progressive realism, in short, relates to the idea of spreading of democracy. The ideas of democracy in Latin America, should serve the interests of the United States. This would be done with encouragement and above-board forms of influence. The first above-board influence that comes to mind is, the gospel of democracy. According to Smith, the ideology of democracy was forcibly spread throughout Latin America