POLITICAL SCIENCE 103- MIDTERM2.) The treaty of Westphalia had distinct impacts on international relations as this notion of sovereignty is established after years of decentralization. Prior to the Treaty there was an overarching religious authority that held Europe at the mercy of this power. There were no distinct secular authorities per state as we see post Westphalia but rather smaller identities that were comprised into a larger authority,which was the Church. During the Middle Ages we see that feudalism was the major systems present which dictated protection over smaller towns in exchange for goods or services. This again showed that there weren’t specific identities of states but rather territories controlled by rulers. Trade and communication between these identities continually grew and the social changes did as well which led to eventually to civil unrest. The first was that after the Treaty virtually all-small states in central Europe attained Sovereignty, as the Holy Roman Empire was now dead. This then legitimized territory and the right of the states to choose their own religion and domestic polices without pressure from other states. The second thing that it did for international relations was that states now could formulate their own national armies to which their sovereignty would be acknowledged as through force. This secularly led to a centralized control of a state’s borders and reinforced individuality between states. The combination of these two changes allowed for states to have a supreme lawmaking authority withintheir territory something that was not seen prior to this change of sovereignty. The third thing that the Treaty did was that it established a core group of states to which dominated the world until the beginning of the nineteenth century. Those states being Austria, Russia, Prussia, France and the United Provinces to which presented changes in the style of government that affect the entire world as these were the leaders at this point. The western states England, France and the United Provinces all underwent an economic revival under capitalism. Those in the East, Prussia and Russia, all reverted to feudal practices. This economic change had dramatic affects on those in the west along with the entire world as private enterprise was encouraged. This increased the infrastructure of states to facilitate commerce, trading and establishing banks to which the commonwealth increased something that wasn’t seen prior. Contemporary international relations would be drastically different than what they are now if it weren’t for the Treaty of Westphalia. Without this shift to sovereign states economic trade and communication would still be dictated by the overarching power of the Church thus being limited severely. With the ability to be sovereign and create borders to which individual states can govern themselves it increases the chance for communication and trade to occur which would create social income for the commonwealth. This was seen through Capitalism which also would not have been possible without the treaty as more than likely Feudalism would have extended further beyond Europe and then create a stronger Religious entity. International relations in my opinion would be vastly controlled still by a single power such as the Church and a system similar to Feudalism would still bepresent, as Capitalism would never have been created. This would then constrict communication and relations to those specific areas that were being controlled by the Church. 4.)Similarities They both believe that anarchy does exist within the worldStates are unitary, rational actorsCooperation is still an issue of the security dilemma States act to benefit themselves DifferencesAnarchy does exist but realism believes anarchy can have severe constraints because of uncertainty while liberalism does not think that cooperation will have constraints through repeated exposures (Shadow of the future) Economic interdependence will ensure fairness by states thus continuing cooperation. They believe that there are chances of cheating but place a high amount of faith in institutions unlike realists. Realism believes that repeated cooperation results in war because it unbalances the status quo and then the states are more likely to cheat and gain an advantage over the other in order to gain power which is ultimately what the state is believed to always want in a state of anarchy as believed by realists. Why it’s importantBecause neo liberalism believes that through repeated cooperation a stronger bond will occur it reflects the fact that states are more likely to trade with one another and continue international relations. While on the other hand Realism will continue to exercise extreme caution with other states it is far less likely that trade agreements nor cooperation will occur thus illustrating the fact that international relations is likely to be halted. 5.) Even though colonization has ended the affects definitely linger but in a different form. This form as articulated by Neo-Marxism is called the World Systems Theory to which exploitation is the new form of colonization. The Core states of the world then exploit those weaker states called periphery states. This is a form of colonization as the core states instead of taking them over use their power to exploittheir resources as a market based colonization. Without the funding from the Core states for the resources of the periphery states those weaker states wouldn’t survivetherefore being reliant on the core states. This form of economic dependence is linked to a form of “neo-imperialism” which was based around the notion of colonizing those states that are weaker and could not defend themselves just like those periphery states can’t defend themselves against economic dependence of the core states. There exists a “world economy” that is directly linked to capitalism, which is dependent on the labor/profit margin in which the hierarchy of states exist. In orderfor the world economy to continue and prosper capitalism must therefore continueas well and thus a lingering sense of colonization exists within the world economy if this sense of exploitation continues. 7.) In my opinion I believe that Neo-Marxism is the most accurate portrayal of how the world truly operates. I believe that this theory correctly explains how in the 21st century international relations continues to function. This can be seen through