# data[].attributes.headline
#1 What are the main approaches to International Political Economy?

# data[].attributes.subject
#1 What are the main approaches to International Political Economy?

# data[].attributes.body
There is a very useful table in the book, at the Contending Perspectives: Summary part. It explains the differences between the 3 main perspectives of international political economy which are Economic nationalism, liberalism and critical theories. We can explain the theories by using that table.

Liberalism: It originated back at the 19th century by Adam Smith, Immanuel Kant and later Hayek and Keynes etc. Its main variants are free trade and interdependence. It is based on the idea of that human nature is cooperative. The units maintaining the system are firms, states, NGOs and individuals etc and sees individuals as rational actor but outcomes not always optimal. It sees transnational companies as beneficial and their relations with the market is positive.

Economic Nationalism: Its origins date back to 15th century and its main figures are Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List and Robert Gilpin. Its main variants are mercantilism and realism and based on the idea of the human nature is aggressive. Its main unit is state which it sees as the unitary actor of the economy and power-seeking rational actor. Its relations with the market have the potential of being negative because of its anarchistic and conflictual structure.

Critical Theories: Based back to 19th century, Critical theories’ main variants are Marxism, feminism and environmentalism and its main actors are Marx, Lenin, Frank and Robert W. Cox. It views human nature as “malleable”.  The main units of critical theories are class, gender, and global capitalism. Its view of the state is that it is a representative of class interest groups. According to them, transnational companies can be exploitative but on the other hand their relations with the market is also exploitative. Their behavioural dynamic is dominance and exploitation within and between states. Their system structure is hierarchy and conflictual.

Utku Asker.

# data[].attributes.headline
#2 - European Countries' Expansionist Activity

# data[].attributes.subject
#2 - European Countries' Expansionist Activity

# data[].attributes.body
The Age of Discovery, started around mid 1400s with Portugal and Spain's colonial movements since at the time they weren't able to encounter the power of the bigger Europen countries such as France or England. And later, when other countries' saw that the discoveries is a way to get stronger and richer, they started doing it too. There were 5 major countries that practised colonialism at first, and then with the the joinings of Belgium, Germany and Italy, it incrased to 8.

Portugal: Portugal is the starter of all these. They started discovery movements around mid 1400s and were active until late 1600s. The regions that they involved in were mostly Brazil and southern Africa.

Spain: Being the second starter, Spain started a little after Portugal, late 1400s and were active until late 1700s. They were mostly operating in the regions of America and Philipinnes.

Netherlands: Netherlands was one of the most succesful countries in terms of colonialism. They started it around early 1600s and were active until late 1700s. Their Dutch East India Company which they used as a tool to operate their economic activities in Indonesia, is one of the biggest companies of all time. They were also active in North America.

England: The empire on which the sun never sets, England, without a doubt was the most succesful colonialist of the time. Even though they started considerably late compared to Spain and Portugal, about 1700s, they were active almost everywhere in the World from Africa to North America, from Carribben to Australia.

France: Starting around 1600s and to 1900s, France was active in almost everywhere in the world, Africa, Americas, South-east Asia, Ocenia.

Germany: Being a late starter, Germany couldn't hold much which lead to a World War. They controlled some lands at Africa but didn't see them enough. The contention between Germany and UK&France in that matter caused a World War.

Utku Asker.

# data[].attributes.headline
#3 - Industrial Revolution and the New Imperialism

# data[].attributes.subject
#3 - Industrial Revolution and the New Imperialism

# data[].attributes.body
The Industrial Revolution is the element that lead to the imbalance of the power between the West and East which caused the colonialism and imperialism to expand to a way greater extent. Before 1880's only 10 percent of the Africa was under the control of European powers, it increased to almost 90 percent by 1914. There are multiple reasons behind it, the fundamental one is that with the Industrial Revolution, the resource need of the countries increased drastically and they tried to compensate these needs somehow and that's why they scrambled Africa. As it is stated in the book: "When the scramble was over, 10 million square miles, 110 million people and 30 colonies were added to European possessions."

The reason behind the New Imperialism is a highly debated issue. As it is stated in the book, "Some stress developments in European countries, while others focus on developments outside Europe; some see the imperial drives as motivated by economic factors, while others stress the role of military competition."

Utku Asker.

# data[].attributes.headline
#4 - Importance of the Coalitions in the International Trade 

# data[].attributes.subject
#4 - Importance of the Coalitions in the International Trade 

# data[].attributes.body
As stated in the book, "many developing countries are too small and have limited bargaining power in international trade negotiations." So, these countries come together and form economic unions to have move power in terms of trade negotiations with other countries.
Another case about this issue is that, these relatively smaller countries have somewhat similar interests over similar issues. Since their concerns about international trade and problems about it are similar, creating coalitions and acting together is a very wise idea.

African Union and its branches could be a good example about this. In their Constitituve Act, they stated that they are "DETERMINED to take up the multifaceted challenges that confront our continent and peoples in the light of the social, economic and political changes taking place in the world"
and they list 14 objectives to reach. Related ones to economy is as following:

...
3) accelerate the political and socio-economic integration of the continent;
4) promote and defend African common positions on issues of interest to the continent and its peoples;
...
9) establish the necessary conditions which enable the continent to play its rightful role in the global economy and in international negotiations;
10) promote sustainable development at the economic, social and cultural levels as well as the integration of African economies;
11) promote co-operation in all fields of human activity to raise the living standards of African peoples;
living standards of African peoples;
12) coordinate and harmonize the policies between the existing and future Regional Economic Communities for the gradual attainment of the objectives of the Union;
13) advance the development of the continent by promoting research in all fields, in particular in science and technology;
...

Utku Asker.

# data[].attributes.body
Turkey is a relatively big country with a population of approx. 80 million. In 2014, general budget revenue of Turkey was around 395 billion Turkish liras, which was approx. 180 billion US dollars at the time. Here, the power of TNCs can be understood from this data.  In 2014, there were 14 companies whose revenue was higher than the whole Turkish government. So, even a relatively big country like Turkey, with, at the time, 70 million population, has lesser budget than 14 companies.

It is clear that companies that increase their power and influence day by day will have a serious impact on countries with medium and small economic power. An era is on the horizon, in which financial power holders will be defined as the real rulers of countries more than the government or the king. This, ethical or not, the only outcome we are to expect from the current system where the only dynamic parts of the wheel are the companies, and the governments and states are in need of the companies' dynamic body.

Utku Asker.

# data[].attributes.body
The most dramatic change that we have witnessed is the transition from fixed to floating currency system. Fixed system can fundamentally be explained as pegging the country's official currency exchange rate to the price of gold (or another country's currency.) with a certain ratio. For instance, the Gold Standard of the USD was at the rate of $35 per ounce of gold which is almost 0.8 grams per dollar. This system can be criticized via many ways. I think, here a sentence from an Economist article explains the core weakness of the fixed currency system against the changing world finance, "In a world of increasingly mobile capital, countries cannot fix their exchange rate and at the same time maintain an independent monetary policy." Also, change towards the floating exchange rates increased the capital-account openness while decreasing the restrictions on capital flows. So, the fall of the fixed exchange rate was a natural one because of the upcoming globalization and free move of finance.

# data[].attributes.body
x

# data[].attributes.body
x

# data[].attributes.body
x