Edexcel A-Level Politics 9PL0
Democracy and Participation
Political Parties
Electoral Systems
Voting Behaviour and the Media
Liberalism
Conservatism
Socialism
The Constitution
Parliament
The Prime Minister and the Executive
Relations Between the Branches
AnarchismNon-core
EcologismNon-core
FeminismNon-core
MulticulturalismNon-core
NationalismNon-core
The US Constitution and FederalismUSA
US CongressUSA
The US PresidencyUSA
The US Supreme Court and Civil RightsUSA
US Democracy and ParticipationUSA
Comparative Theories and the UK-US ComparisonUSA
The State and GlobalisationGlobal
Global Governance: Political and EconomicGlobal
Global Governance: Human Rights and EnvironmentalGlobal
Power and DevelopmentsGlobal
Regionalism and the European UnionGlobal
Global Comparative TheoriesGlobal
Global Comparative Theories
Evaluating realism and liberalism against events since 2000
- 3 things to know
- Component 3
Overview
Recall questions on how each theory reads Iraq, the financial crisis, humanitarian intervention, climate negotiations, the EU and great-power competition.
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
How would a realist explain the invasion of Iraq in 2003?
How do the two theories read the record of climate negotiations?
Questions from this subtopic
Each one with the model answer underneath.
- 1
Why does the specification require realism and liberalism to be tested against recent events?
Model answer
Because a theory of global politics is only useful if it accounts for what has actually happened. Judging both against the same case studies shows where each explains events well and where it fails.
- 2
How would a realist explain the invasion of Iraq in 2003?
Model answer
As a great power acting on its own security calculation in a unipolar system: the absence of any counterweight, and the willingness to proceed without Security Council authorisation, showed that institutions restrain the strong only when the strong consent.
- 3
How would a liberal explain the same episode?
Model answer
As a failure that demonstrated the theory's point in reverse: acting outside the institutions cost the intervening states legitimacy, allies and eventual effectiveness, and the reconstruction failed where international cooperation was weakest.
- 4
What does the response to the 2008 financial crisis suggest about the two theories?
Model answer
Liberals point to coordinated action through the G20 and central banks, which averted collapse. Realists point out that the coordination lasted only as long as the emergency and that states then returned to protecting their own economies.
- 5
What does the record of humanitarian intervention since 2000 suggest?
Model answer
It supports both readings. That intervention is now argued for in terms of a duty to protect civilians is a liberal development; that it happens only where powerful states have an interest, and stops where they do not, is a realist one.
- 6
How do the two theories read the record of climate negotiations?
Model answer
Liberals emphasise that nearly every state has joined a framework and accepted monitoring. Realists emphasise that commitments are voluntary, unenforceable and set nationally, so states concede only what suits them.
Other ways to work this
The same content, four other ways.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
Every question in Global Comparative Theories, on a schedule.
Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.
Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.