LIBERALISM

PREPARED BY
DARIA DEREVIANCHUK
ANASTASIA GORDIENKO 19.02.19
 PLAN
What are the basic assumptions of liberalism?

What distinguishes different types of liberalism from each

other?

When and why do the states cooperate?

Democratic countries do not fight each other, do they?

Key terms:   Liberal theory, social actors, interdependence, positive-sum game / zero-sum game;
ideational, commercial and republican liberalism, liberal pacifism, liberal imperialism, liberal
internationalism; neoliberalism, cooperation; democratic peace theory  2
 A LIBERAL THEORY OF
INTERNATIONAL POLITICS
    by Andrew Moravcsik

“Liberal IR theory elaborates the

insight that state-society relations
—the relationship of states to the
domestic and transnational social
context in which they are
embedded—have a fundamental
impact on state behavior in world
politics. Societal ideas, interests,
and institutions influence state
behavior by shaping state
preferences, that is, the
fundamental social purposes
underlying the strategic
calculations of governments.” 

(Moravscik, p.513) 3
WHAT ARE THE BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF
LIBERALISM?
Are individuals and private groups, who
are on the average rational and risk-averse
and who organize exchange and collective
The Primacy of Societal action to promote differentiated interests
under constraints imposed by material
Actors  scarcity, conflicting values, and variations in
societal influence.

States (or other political

Representation and institutions) represent some subset
of domestic society, on the basis of
State Preferences  whose interests state officials
define state preferences and
act purposivelyin world politics. 
Interdependence and
the International The configuration of
System interdependent state preferences
determines state behavior. 

4
FOR
LIBERALS

5
 BROADER IMPLICATIONS OF LIBERAL
THEORY 

1.  It suggests a theory of world politics that

parsimoniously connects a wide range of
distinctive and previously unrelated hypotheses
concerning areas unexplained by existing
theories. 
2.  It offers a plausible explanation for historical
change in the international system
3.  It offers a plausible explanation for the
distinctiveness of modern international politics.
6
 WHAT DISTINGUISHES DIFFERENT TYPES OF
LIBERALISM FROM EACH OTHER?
His work A. Moravcsik “Taking Preferences Seriously:  A Liberal Theory of
International Politics” based a liberal tradition dating back to John Stuart Mill,
Giuseppe Mazzini, and Woodrow Wilson
He highlights the following types of liberalism:
Ideational liberalism  Commercial liberalism  Republican liberalism
the impact on state behavior the impact on state behavior the impact on state behavior
of the compatibility of social of gains and losses to of varying forms of domestic
preferences between individuals/groups in society representation, individuals
fundamental collective from transnational economic and their preferences. 
goods, such as national unity, interchange and incentives
legitimate political institutions created by opportunities for
and socio-economic transborder economic
regulation. transactions. 7
 LIBERALISM AND WORLD POLITICS
by Michael Doyle

                 Liberal       
         Liberal  pacifism        Liberal imperialism            internationalism

• J.Shumpeter saw the
pacifying effect of liberal
institutions and principles
• Development of capitalism &
democracy ->  destruction of
imperialism -> peace
• The capitalist populace is
”democratized,
individualized, rationalized”
(Doyle, p.74) and demand
democratic governance  us, we prepare ourselves for
•  People’s material interests
lay in peaceful trade
• Mixed republic - the best • Kant’s republics are capable
form of state for imperial of achieving peace among
expansion (the only chance themselves and still remain in
for state to survive)  a state of war with non-
• Expansion calls for a FREE republics
republic  • Republican constitution is the
• “We seek to rule or, at least, most desirable circumstance
to avoid being oppressed… for perpetual peace, and the
Because other states with absence of war is dependent
similar aims thereby threaten on mutual respect between
states based on regime type
expansion”(2)   • “Perpetual peace is the end
point of the hard journey
republics will take..” 8
(Doyle,p.82)
 WHEN AND WHY DO THE STATES
COOPERATE?​ 

Possibilities for cooperation :

REALISM LIBERALISM NEOLIBERALISM

• Has no place for • Cooperation should be • States are able to work
cooperation   • Positive-sumgame together 
• Zero-sumgame 9
 CHANGES
NEEDED FOR
COOPERATION

10
DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES DO NOT FIGHT EACH
OTHER, DO THEY?

11
 WHAT IS DEMOCRACY AND WAR?

• ”Democracy” – when the leaders of its executive

and legislative powers are determined by
competitive fair elections. If we suppose that at
least two political parties that are formally
independent of each other, the right to vote has at
least half of the adult population, that will be
classified as competitive and fair.

• “International wars” - it is considered to be an

armed clash of at least two sovereign states with a
total death toll of more than 1,000 combatants 12

without taking into account civilian casualties.

1. For Liberals cooperation is very important. Societal ideas, interests, and institutions influence state
behavior by shaping state preferences, that is, the fundamental social purposes underlying the strategic
calculations of governments.

2. According to Moravcsik, there are Ideational liberalism, Commercial liberalism and Republican Liberalism. All of
them differ in the impact of various factors on state behavior. Whereas Doyle highlights Liberal pacifism, Liberal
imperialism and Liberal Internationalism which are different in perception of political regimes by Shumpeter,
Machiavelli and Kant.

3. `Cooperation can be` say neoliberalists. Institutions can play a large role here, and this helps explain why
institutionalized cooperation can continue even when the initially propitious conditions have
disappeared. Neoliberals are more optimistic than realists because they believe that changes in preferences
over strategies usually are sufficient to produce mutual benefit. 

4. After analyzing the argument that democracies do not fight each other, we have come to the conclusion that this
statement is more an idealistic utopian dream than a statement of fact. 13
 REFERENCES

1. Andrew Moravscik, ‘Taking Preferences Seriously: a Liberal Theory of International

Politics,’ International Organization, 1997 (51), no.4: 512-553
2. Michael Doyle, ‘Liberalism and World Politics,’ American Political Science
Review, 1986 (80): 1151-1170.
3. Robert Jervis, “Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation”, International Security, 1999
(24/1): 42-63.
4. Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, ”Power and Interdependence”, 4ht.Ed., Longman,
chapters 1-3, 10 and part IV. 14
15