The Failure of the United Kingdom

Severe recessions have occurred throughout the years (1930’s, 80’s and 90’s). These economic downturns resulted in substantial unemployment rates.  The recessions also impacted other countries around the world, but the fact that the United Kingdom never fully recovered from the initial recession, while other countries did, has resulted in the major decline of the standard of living over the century. I ranked this first because their inability to recover from economic crisis is what is keeping the UK at such a low standard of living, without money there is know power.

The loss of colonies caused multiple issues for the UK.  The colonies of the UK allowed for more space, income, resources, etc.  The loss of these colonies also gives the impression that the government is losing its influence, and power in the world.  The United Kingdom also invested in these colonies to help them industrialize, therefore, to the UK’s government; this would appear to be a waste of time and money.  This was ranked second on the scale because this loss is most likely a contributor to the recessions, and result in decreased opprotunities for the population.

The United Kingdom’s major role in both, World War I and World War II caused significant problems.  Although the wars provided ample amount of employment the negative consequences were much greater.  The expenses of war only cause the UK’s economy to decline further preceding the war, as well as the loss men’s lives dwindled the standard of living for the families they left behind.  WWI and WWII also demonstrated to the world other countries such as the United States were much more powerful and innovative than the UK.  I ranked this as the third factor because the consequences of these wars were long lasting, and contributed to multiple other factors such as recession and international relations, but these wars also provided job opprotunities and helped in the women’s movement by allowing them to work.

The United Kingdom borrowed money from former colonies such as the US to assist in their economic situation after WWII, and only just paid them back in 2006.  The lending and borrowing of money occurs in multiple countries, however this loan was a representation of the UK bending the knee to their former colony the US.  I rated this fourth because as said previously whoever has the money, has the power.   This event only reinforced the US’s power in the world, and confirmed the declining status of the UK.

How to Categorize the World

There are many ways to categorize the regions of the world whether it is by economic status or mode governance.  All categories possess strengths and weakness because it is hard to find the perfect category that will incorporate all qualities of a country that can also be used broadly enough to incorporate other countries as well.

There are four methods to categorize the world:

1.  Developed/Developing World:  

This type of categorization is good because it allows political scientists to differentiate between countries that have industrialized/post industrialization and the rest of the world.  This allows political scientists to view the world in terms of the economic wealth derived from industrialization.  The downside to this is that “the rest of the world” includes countries that are not industrialized, those that are working hard to become industrialized, and those that are perhaps almost completely industrialized. A country that may even now be industrialized, like China is still considered to be developing because it did not develop in sync with the other developed countries.

2.  The First/Second/Third World:

This mode of separating the world is just a more in depth version of the developed/developing world model.  The developed world is seperated into the First and Second World based on the mode of governance (democratic vs. communist) and who your alliances were during the Cold War.  The third world encompasses everyone else. This is a good method if for a political scientist who’s studying the Cold War era and how relationships and wealth were distributed.  However, the USSR is no longer in existence and multiple countries that were once communist are now moving towards democracy.

3.  Global North/Global South:

Using Global North and Global South is a great way to compare countries mode of governance as well as their economic success.  The democratic wealthy countries are Global North and the remaining countries form the Global South.  These terms do not incorporate the intermediate countries that are transitioning to democracy.  The terms are also misleading, as it tends to make people think that North refers to the Northern hemisphere, which is not the case.  A lot of criteria must be fulfilled before become part of the Global North; therefore this is not a great method for comparison.

4.  Entrenched democracies/ Transitional democracy/ Authoritarian state:

This model focuses on the mode of governance within a country.  This model eliminates the wealth component in seen in the Global North/Global south method and adds a middle category to incorporate all those intermediate countries.  The trouble with this model is that there is an exact checklist as to what makes a country and entrenched democracy or a transitional democracy (the edges are blurry).  This might make placing some countries into a category more difficult.  Unlike the other models, such as the First/Second/Third World, this method allows countries to be able to move between categories (entrenched democracy, transitional democracy, and authoritarian state) a lot more simple.

Based on my analysis of each mode of categorizing the world I believe the use of the entrenched democracy/ transitional democracy/ authoritarian regime is the best model to use for comparison in todays time.  The problems with this model do not seem as substaintial as the other models, in this case the pros out way the cons.   Nevertheless depending on what you wish to compare another method might present better range of variables.  

Pros and Cons of Joining the European Union

PROS:

• Free trade and no tariffs between the membered countries.
• They offer a common currency.  The use of the euro is mandatory as seen in countries such as   Great Britain.
•    EMU sets a common currency exchange rate.
• European citizenship allows for free movement between membered countries. 
• This opens up more job opprotunities, therefore more potential to earn money. (Chartered Rights)
• The broad range of membered countries opens up the access to a lot more resources.
• There is no conflict between membered countries.  The solution to squabbles must be found according to regulations set out by the EU committee? Parliament?
•  Can create a sense of belongingness, and unity amongst EU members
• Multiple EU capitals so access to government members is readily assessable to citizens.
• Members work together to support other members’ sustainability.
•  Regional development funding
• The EU has scholarships that promote education of citizens.
• National identity of members is not compromised.
• No official languages
•  Regulations have been put in place so larger countries, like France and Germany cannot dominate the smaller countries.
• Provide many public agencies to citizens
• There are subsidies for farmers
• The European central bank monitors interest rates.

CONS:

• There’s no common language between the countries, therefore communication is to all citizens at once is difficult.
• The extra level of government can remove some of the power and responsibility of the country.
• The regulations set up to protect the smaller membered countries can take from the larger countries.
• Threatens the national identity of membered states, like in Sweden.
•  Meeting the requirements to join is hard.
• The border of Europe is undefined, but you have to be apart of Europe to join the EU (ex: Morocco)
• Governmental criteria and economic standards are important.
• The executive, the European Commission serves the EU’s interest not the individual country.
• Member states have less control over what is made or sold in their borders.
• Loss of sovereinity as many individuals in Greece have suggested.
• The wealthier countries like Germany have share their wealth with other membered countries
• Bailing out Greece
•  All members are bound by the same rules; therefore outside countries are capable of influencing your country.
•  Hard to withdraw from the EU once you have joined.
• The EU can kick out leader of government if they feel it is necessary
• In Greece they removed the democratically elected leader and appointed an alternative.