Ever since realism became to lose its popularity among international relations observers, scholars have predicted that the state will eventually become obsolete, meaning that either, the world will become some kind of supra-regional blocks (akin to the European Union) or that states will become meaningless and we will revert into some kind of city-states system, where what will matter is your ethnic, religious, or other identity affiliation in a particular city, than what state you’re a citizen of. There is at least some evidence of this. The most obvious is the European Union, where borders have been blurred, and the word du jour is pooled sovereignty. There is much more evidence than this, however. Today, one can live in California, going to English-speaking school, listening exclusively to Spanish music, and watching Italian local soccer games. One can also live in Minnesota, and actively work to bring an end to the genocide in Darfur, live in South Africa and work for a company in Miami, live in Tokyo and have most of your property in New York. More importantly, social movements, NGOs, multi-national corporations, interest group coalitions, international organizations and business lobbyists span borders and can simultaneously affect state politics and international politics in many states at once. On the other hand, states have a difficult time controlling their borders and national sovereignty seems to be more and more under threat. Despite this, states at the moment remain the main unit within the international system. Thus, the question is, do you think that states will continue to be so in the future (you can define that for yourself, whether you think the immediate or long term)? Why or why not?
Whatever side you choose, you must give me AT LEAST THREE reasons why you believe that to be the case. Thus, if you believe the state will be replaced by something else, tell me what that is, and why that will happen. If you do not believe that will be the case, that the international system will continue more or less unabated, tell me why the present trends: globalization, interdependence and the continued blurring of state borders will not ultimately change the state system. Is there something about the state system that it makes it impervious to these trends? Is there something about these trends that make them unlikely to change the status quo? Also make sure to tell me if the state will be changed at all.
This is also an opinion paper, and more speculative. Thus, make sure that your argument is clear and your suggestions persuasive. Think about possible criticisms and address them in your paper, it will make it much stronger. Your paper will be 10 pages long. Times News Roman, 12pt and one inch margins.
Suggested organization of your paper:
In case of change in the state system:
Introduction (2 page)
State-system will be changed into this (description) (2 page)
Reason number 1 (1.5 page)
Reason 2 (1.5 page)
Reason 3 (1.5 page)
Conclusion (2 page)
In case of NO change in the system:
Introduction (2 page)
Any changes in the state? Description (1 page or ½ page, depending).
Reason 1 (1.5 to 2 to pages)
Reason 2 (1.5 to 2 pages)
Reason 3 (1. 5 to 2 pages)
Conclusion (2 page)
This will be your last opportunity to turn in your paper. Should you choose to do this paper, it will be due on May 2. Remember,
If you want to cite anything, it should look something like this:
