{"id":146862,"date":"2016-01-18T15:42:28","date_gmt":"2016-01-18T20:42:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.designerchildren.com\/rationalism-international-relations-wikipedia-the\/"},"modified":"2016-01-18T15:42:28","modified_gmt":"2016-01-18T20:42:28","slug":"rationalism-international-relations-wikipedia-the","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/rationalism\/rationalism-international-relations-wikipedia-the\/","title":{"rendered":"Rationalism (international relations) &#8211; Wikipedia, the &#8230;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Rationalism in politics is often seen as the midpoint in    the three major political viewpoints of realism, rationalism, and internationalism. Whereas    Realism and Internationalism are both on ends of the scale,    rationalism tends to occupy the middle ground on most issues,    and finds compromise between these two conflicting points of    view.  <\/p>\n<p>    Believers of Rationalism believe that multinational    and multilateral organizations have their    place in the world order, but not that a world    government would be feasible. They point to current    international organizations, most notably the United    Nations, and point out that these organizations leave a lot    to be desired and, in some cases, do more harm than good. They    believe that this can be achieved through greater international law making procedures and    that the use of force can be avoided in resolving    disputes.[1]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rationalists tend to see the rule of law and order as being equally    important to states as it helps reduce conflicts. This    in turn helps states become more willing to negotiate treaties    and agreements where it best suits their interests. However,    they see it as wrong for a nation to promote its own national    interests, reminiscent of Internationalism, but that there is    already a high level of order in the international system    without a world government.[1]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rationalists believe that states have a right to sovereignty,    particularly over territory, but that this sovereignty can be    violated in exceptional circumstances, such as human rights    violations.  <\/p>\n<p>    In situations such as that of Burma after Cyclone    Nargis, rationalists find it acceptable for other states to    violate that country's sovereignty in order to help its people.    This would be where an organisation such as the United    Nations would come in and decide whether the situation is    exceptional enough to warrant a violation of that state's    sovereignty.[1]  <\/p>\n<p>    Realists believe that states act independently of each other    and that states' sovereignty is effectively sacred.    Rationalists agree to a certain extent. However, as stated    previously, rationalism includes sovereignty as a vital factor,    but not as untouchable and 'sacred'.  <\/p>\n<p>    Realists also hold the Treaty of    Westphalia and the international system that arose from    this as the international system that prevails to this day.    Rationalists acknowledge that the treaty has played an    important part in shaping international relations and the world    order and that certain aspects, such as sovereignty, still    exist and play a vital role, but not that it has survived in    its entirety. They believe that through the existence of    international    organisations, such as the European Union and the United    Nations, the international system is less anarchic than Realists claim.[2]  <\/p>\n<p>    Internationalists believe in a world order where an effective    world    government would govern the world, that sovereignty is an    outdated concept and barrier to creating peace, the need for a    common humanity and the need for cooperative solutions.    Rationalists adhere to these beliefs to some extent. For    example, with regards to the need for a common humanity and    cooperative solutions, rationalists see this as being achieved    without the need to abolish sovereignty and the Westphalian    concept of the nation-state. The current system is seen as the    example of this, as nation-states still hold their sovereignty    and yet international organisations exist that potentially have    the power to violate it, for the need to create peace, law and    order.[1]  <\/p>\n<p>    It is believed that the proposals for reform of the United    Nations come from rationalist thoughts and points of view.    This belief is held because most members of the UN agree that    the UN requires reform, in the way of expanding or abolishing    the Security Council and granting it more    powers to violate sovereignty if necessary.[1]  <\/p>\n<p>    Some figures who consider themselves as 'rationalist' include:  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Read more:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Rationalism_(international_relations)\" title=\"Rationalism (international relations) - Wikipedia, the ...\">Rationalism (international relations) - Wikipedia, the ...<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Rationalism in politics is often seen as the midpoint in the three major political viewpoints of realism, rationalism, and internationalism. Whereas Realism and Internationalism are both on ends of the scale, rationalism tends to occupy the middle ground on most issues, and finds compromise between these two conflicting points of view. Believers of Rationalism believe that multinational and multilateral organizations have their place in the world order, but not that a world government would be feasible <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/rationalism\/rationalism-international-relations-wikipedia-the\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187714],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-146862","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rationalism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/146862"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=146862"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/146862\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=146862"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=146862"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=146862"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}