Session 15: Liberalism: Historically Tested

In his article “Liberalism and World Politics”, Doyle discusses the three and probably the most significant forms of liberalism. Doyle, uses the basic frame work laid out by Schumpeter, Machiavelli and Kant. For the case of Liberal pacifism he quotes Schumpeter, for liberal imperialism he refers to Machiavelli and lastly for liberal internationalism the literature of Kant is used. Instead of presenting his own ideas, Doyle refers to the works of the above mentioned authors and uses their definitions of liberalism to relate to liberal states around the globe.    

In doing so he explains the coherence among all the states based upon liberalistic ideas.  Doyle argues that the tendency of liberal states to form peace with other liberal states cannot be undermined. Although, at times this peace is exclusionary and is restricted to states based on liberal ideologies. He also highlights the similarities among liberal states. Which generally range from basic human rights, within the states, to firm yet accommodating foreign policy making tactics, in the international landscape.

However the main focus of his article is the endless conflict between liberal states and states based on other ideologies. In Doyle’s view, liberal states share a peace among themselves that is primarily because of the fact that they create a homologous environment at micro-scale, within the state, and at macro-scale, with other nations. He highlights the fact that because these states share the same fundamental values they are less likely to go to war with one another and at times may even form allegiances with former enemies in case of a war, such as the siding of Italy with the Allies to fight against its former allies, Germany and Austria. In my opinion, the views shared by Doyle do have practical importance. If we look at all the major conflicts in recorded history a majority of them lie in the domain of Liberal vs. Non-Liberal category. And only a few instances of conflicts between liberal states. Hence, I for one completely agree with the case Doyle makes.