While the two debates groups were paired well considering their topics, I think team "Climate Change" (team 1) had the most concrete reasons guiding their argument and was the most convincing. However, I don't think anybody would argue that team "Breakdown of Liberal Order" (team 4) is indeed the greatest threat to US Power.
Team 4 did a wonderful job of praising their opponent's argument as well as an excellent job of detailing how the liberal order has supported the current power of the US. They outlined how each piece of the current system both benefits the US and strategically places the US in a place of influence over countries around the world. However, an argument claiming that changing such a system will diminish the power of the US is akin to saying that a fashion designer changing their style of clothes is bound to end up with an ugly new fashion style. In reality, people change their clothes styles all the time and usually get a better sense of what style benefits their body type, lifestyle and comfort with every change. Of course, not every attempt is a success, but most humans have been changing their style of clothes their whole lives and are quite good at its logistics. A fashion designer in particular has likely invented numerous successful lines of clothes or else they would no longer be a fashion designer. Sure, if we all stopped wearing clothes, that is another problem...
The world order has been changing, evolving and adjusting since we can remember. WWII was not the first struggle for the US and not nearly the last it has encountered. In addition, the US was quite influential and powerful before WWII occurred.
I would argue that a change in the liberal order is indeed the greatest threat to US power in the short run. However, due to our proven centuries of innovation, survival in adversity, and ability to admit while correcting our faults, the US is likely to be able to recover in the long run. Sure, if we all stopped identifying with a sovereign nation, that is another problem...
Katherine,
ReplyDeleteI think that the post-WWII order is critical. When we talked in class about what would happen for the US if this was renegotiated today, everyone seemed to agree that the US would come out with a less favorable position. An evolution of the world order may be manageable, but a dissolution of NATO or something similar in size could be catastrophic.
Katherine,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the world order has been changing and evolving. However, Erica makes a good point that the post-WWII order is significant for US power. While the US definitely was influential prior to WWII, it was not as powerful as it has been since the end of WWII and the Cold War.
The liberal order that the US created after WWII allowed for the US to become so powerful. Without the creation of the Bretton Woods system and important institutions like the WTO, for example, the US would not be an economic powerhouse.
Small changes to this order are definitely manageable, but a termination of institutions like the WTO could have immense negative effects for the US economy and its power.