1. Plan for Today: Forms of Liberalism in IR  Delving in detail into newer forms of liberalism: 1.“English school”. 2.Liberal Interdependence. 3.Neoliberal Institutionalism.

2. International Society/ “English School”: Hedley Bull  The Anarchical Society (1977)  Argued that a society of sorts has developed in international politics.  Criticizes realist view that anarchy is brutal: International state of nature not Hobbesian state of nature. Perhaps Lockean state of nature instead.

3. International Society/ “English School”: Hedley Bull  Limited society develops in system of states that are in constant contact with one another.  Examples: 1.“Hue and cry” raised by other states when one state does something morally abhorrent. 2.Loyalty among allies – carries on beyond the security needs of states.

4. Liberal Interdependence Theory  Ontology: Includes many different kinds of actors as being causally significant actors. “Global civil society” States International organizations NGOs MNCs “Experts”

5. Liberal Interdependence Theory  Free trade and removal of barriers to commerce  integration and cooperation among states. Early works: cooperation in limited technical areas could “spill over” into other areas for mutual benefit. E.g. Keohane & Nye (1977)

6. Liberal Interdependence Theory  Technological change of key importance (esp. communications, travel). 1.Increases power of nonstate actors.  Email and Internet revolutionary.  E.g. Friedman: Lexus and the Olive Tree. 2.Decreases costs & risks of cooperation. 1.Trade less costly. 2.More information to decrease uncertainty.

7. Neoliberal Institutionalism  Assumptions (accept realist) – Robert Keohane, After Hegemony (1984) 1.States are the main actors. 2.States are selfish and rational actors. 3.International system is anarchic.

8. Neoliberal Institutionalism  Principal Claims: 1.New conclusion : cooperation can develop among states under anarchy. 2.Anarchy is mitigated by regimes and institutional cooperation, which bring regular patterns to IR.

9. Neoliberal Institutionalism Regimes  Regime (Krasner definition): “implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules, and decisionmaking procedures around which actors’ expectations converge in a given area” i.e. sets of rules that may or may not have international organizations associated with them. Similar to “institution.” Bigger than individual agreements.

10. Neoliberal Institutionalism Regimes  Example: Bretton Woods international monetary regime (1944-1970s) Governed currency relations among states, allowing for significant domestic capital controls. International Monetary Fund created as part of regime.

11. Neoliberal Institutionalism Regimes  Neoliberals: argue regimes can play role in helping states to realize mutual interests.  Neorealists: argue regimes defined according to power capabilities of states. E.g. Bretton Woods – reflected US interests.

12. Neoliberal Institutionalism  Area and Problems of Focus: Chiefly economic issues. Usually actions to resolve instances of market failure: problems that prevent markets from providing socially optimal allocation of resources.