Suchergebnisse

Collaboration is an intense cooperation aimed at realizing common objectives; coordination wants to avoid adverse interests. There is anarchy when governments make unilateral decisions. In conflicts actors have incompatible scopes. The World Health Organization implemented some standards to help governments to manage the sanitary emergence. The communication network of health technicians has informally pushed governments to apply those standards. Eastern Asian states were faster in their reactions than Western countries. Coordination worked with the diffusion of informal norms and not of codified and binding regimes of international law. Sweden did not fully apply those standards, but without deep objections and with ad hoc exceptions. Taiwan's standards were even more efficient than WHO.

Drawing upon extensive experience of both theoretical and empirical research, according to the Italian school of Political Science, this book provides a holistic assessment of contemporary world politics. It begins by defining concepts such as "world order", before going on to classify foreign policies into four models of political cultures: namely, the "interests-intensive" conservative; the "ideologies-intensive" liberal, the leftist constructivist, and the leftist Manichean. The volume shows how multipolar and bipolar systems have remained relatively stable, with each main power defending its own interests, yet ultimately not promoting ideas and order. Change periods, however, are instable. Between 1915 and 1945, Nazi-fascist and communist ideologies emerged, but, after Yalta, the West did not effectively export market, democracy and peace to the Third World. After 1989, the ideas of liberalism (in economic globalization and EU enlargement), neo-conservatism (in the Iraq war), and multi-cultural leftism (in pluri-national conflict resolution processes) began to be applied toward a "near" world order. Since 2001, Islamic fundamentalism's threat has prevented both stability (with the failure of the concert of powers of the 1990s), and order (with minimal improvements in democracy and peace). Following the Arab Spring, Obama has also abandoned interests-intensive conservative diplomacy, no longer supporting "lesser evils" (personalistic or military regimes) against "absolute evils" (such as the Islamic State), and waged only "low intensity" wars in Iraq, Syria and Libya.

In this article, political economies have been linked to the decision-making processes of Latin American countries, before and after 1989. Conservative and liberal reforms have usually been applied through neo-oligarchic decision-making processes. Social-democrat economic policies have often been implemented with neo-corporatism. When "soft" populism prevailed, partitocrazia was the typical political instrument of lef­tist governments, either if they governed or if they were at the opposition. Thus, they usual­ly vetoed rightist presidents' market reforms. The political consequence of "hard" populism has been authoritarianism, like in Venezuela with Chavez and Maduro. In "hybrid" economic policies, combining different models of political economies, there is not a stable decision-making process, and political conflict is usually strongeru, Chile and Argentina. ; In questo articolo, le politiche economiche sono state collegate ai processi decisionali dei paesi dell'America latina. Le riforme conservatrici e liberali sono state di solito applicate con processi decisionali neo-oligarchici. Le politiche economiche social-democratiche sono state attuate grazie al neo-corporativismo. Quando il populismo moderato ha prevalso, la partitocrazia è stato il tipico strumento politico dei governi di sinistra: sia al governo che all'opposizione (nel secondo caso scattava il veto verso presidenti filo liberisti). La conseguenza politica del populismo radicale è stato l'autoritarismo (vedi il Venezuela di Chavez e Maduro). Nelle politiche economiche ibride, cioè che combinano tipi diversi di politica economica, il processo decisionale non è stabile e il conflitto politico è di solito molto forte.

Populism can be defined as the post-Marxist adaptation of leftist Manicheanism. In Western Europe, this process materialized after 1989, while in Latin America populism was applied before 1989. Populism is based on: a Manichean ideology with a binary cosmology of the world; the expansion of the public expenditure with damaging effects (high inflation rates) on the economy; charismatic leaders making plebiscitary appeals to the population, with a limited role of intermediate actors (interests groups or parties) and institutions; a high mobilization process from above leading to a movimientismo of the lower sectors of the population. The four cases of orthodox macro-economic populism were: Peron in Argentina, Allende in Chile, Garcia in Peru, and Chavez/Maduro in Venezuela. In partial populism, there is plebiscitarianism, but the increase of the public expenditure and of the inflation rate remains under control (Syriza, Movimento 5 Stelle, Correa, Morales, and Cristina Kirchner). Orthodox populism has always had negative consequences in politics, leading to authoritarian regimes, increased conflict and military coups; instead, partial populism has never endangered democracy and is usually coupled with hybrid/illiberal regimes. The political cultures of the right are not populist, because there is not the increase of public expenditure, but there is plebiscitarianism. ; Antes de definir el populismo, es importante identificar las principales culturas políticas en las democracias contemporáneas occidentales. Las culturas políticas pueden definirse como conjuntos coherentes de ideologías, que están "un tanto" (es decir, de una manera diferente) vinculadas a la promoción de ciertos intereses. La forma concreta en que se vinculan las ideas y los intereses depende de la cultura política particular y no puede seleccionarse de manera abstracta para todos ellos (ver más abajo). ¿Cuáles son las principales culturas políticas occidentales contemporáneas? Hay dos enfoques para responder esta pregunta. El enfoque de los divisores es elaborar una clasificación (o tipología) de las ideologías de los partidos. La lista será larga, porque estos instrumentos analíticos deben ser exhaustivos. En cambio, el enfoque de los lumpers es el de idear modelos, es decir, los tipos ideales de Weber; la lista será mucho más corta, porque esas categorías no son exhaustivas e identifican solo aquellos comportamientos que obedecen a condiciones de simplicidad y coherencia. Los modelos se han utilizado con mayor frecuencia en la fase "moderna" de las ciencias humanas (1950 y 1960), y fueron aplicados especialmente por la escuela italiana de ciencias políticas.

Stability is defined as an international system with the same distribution of power for a long period of time. World order is defined as a governance anchored to the promotion of four steady values (the units of measurement) in each arena of international relations: democracy (political), market (economic), peace (military), national self-determination leading to single-nation states (cultural). Multipolar and bipolar systems were stable, but disordered, as values promoted by the main powers were not steady. Change periods were/ are unstable: from 1915 to 1945 and after 1989. In the 1990s there was an attempt to consolidate both order and stability, through the concert of powers; as pluri-national states prevailed after 1989, it was only a 'near order'. Since 2001, there has been neither stability (both unipolarism and multipolarism failed), nor order, as the promotion of those values has been weakened by the West (especially by Obama and Trump) because of the objections of Islamic fundamentalist groups (and in part by China, Russia, Venezuela). A "disordered stability" and the return to the conservative diplomacies of 'real-politik' (with the West promoting 'lesser evil' authoritarian regimes and waging wars to fight Islamic fundamentalism) has not re-emerged yet. The Usa are not a great power anymore, as both Obama and Trump were/are shy and uncertain in foreign policy. An "unstable order" would be anchored to the promotion of single-nation (only Shiite or only Sunni, Palestinian, Kurd) states. ; La stabilità di un sistema internazionale è collegata alla stessa distribuzione del potere per un lungo periodo di tempo. L'ordine mondiale può essere definito come quella forma di governance che viene ancorata alla promozione di alcuni valori costanti (le unità di misura) in ogni arena delle relazioni internazionali: democrazia (politica), mercato (economica), pace (militare) e auto-determinazione nazionale che porta a stati mono-nazionali (culturale). I sistemi multipolari e bipolari sono stati stabili, ma disordinati, perché i valori promossi dalle maggiori potenze non erano costanti. I periodi di cambiamento sono di solito instabili: dal 1915 al 1945 e dopo l'89. Negli anni '90 c'è stato un tentativo di consolidare sia l'ordine che la stabilità, attraverso il concerto delle potenze, ma siccome gli stati pluri-nazionali hanno prevalso, c'è stato solo un ordine "zoppo". Dopo il 2001, non c'è stata né stabilità perché sia l'unipolarismo che il multipolarismo sono falliti, né ordine, perché l'Occidente (soprattutto con Obama e Trump) ha indebolito la promozione di quei tre valori di fronte alle obiezioni dei gruppi islamici fondamentalisti, e (in parte) di Cina, Russia, Venezuela. Non è ancora riemersa una "stabilità disordinata" e il ritorno alle diplomazie conservatrici della real-politik, con l'Occidente che promuove regimi autoritari considerati "mali minori" e che scatena guerre per combattere i fondamentalisti islamici. Gli Usa non sono più una grande potenza, a causa della politica estera timida e incerta di Obama e Trump. Un "ordine instabile" sarebbe collegato alla promozione di stati mono-nazionali: uno palestinese, uno curdo, ed entità con cittadini solo sciiti o solo sunniti.