Pluralism vs Solidarism
How does Hedley Bull’s conclusions on the pluralist/solidarist debate help us understand the issue of human rights during the Cold War?Hedley Bull’s conclusions on the pluralist and solidarist debate helps are understanding of human rights issues in the Cold War in terms of why the USA responded in contradicting ways to various human rights abuses from different state actors. Throughout the Cold War, the US concept of order was that of a solidarist in so far as it believed its conception of human rights to be the only correct one. However, its views were tempered by prudence in that due to the international bipolar system, the US could not just inflict its view of human rights on the Soviets without expecting retaliation. Therefore, US behavior was essentially pluralist, although during the Carter administration, this pluralism was diluted with elements of solidarism. Bull is ultimately a pluralist. However, his version of pluralism incorporates some aspects of the solidarist debate as he is drawn to the solidarist theory of the international society which incorporates considerations of order ad seeks to place justice at the centre of foreign policy. He incorporates this belief into his version of pluralism, as he grew increas
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Cold War, Soviet Union, Nicaragua Somoza, Cuba Communist, human rights, Franklin Roosevelt, Accordingly Americans, Eastern European, Reza Pahlavi, Hedley Bulls, Address Carter, cold war, rights abuses, human rights abuses, foreign policy, tempered prudence, rights cold war, soviet union, issue human, rights diplomacy, human rights diplomacy, rights cold, hedley bulls, issue human rights, human rights cold,
Approximate Word count = 1558
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
