Anarchy: What it is and What it isn't

Introduction 

Anarchy refers to a condition whereby a state runs without the government, in other words, it means Introduction. Norms, on the other hand, refers to a standard achievement that is achieved by a country. Anarchy can create to build different foundations for liberal and realization of the international relations. The three most prominent theories on international relations are realism, liberalism, and constructivism. Constructivism has been described as a challenge in the international relations the term constructionists according to Michael Barnett refers to how different ideas of various people define the internal structure of the state. Also, defines how the state and non state members reproduce these structures (Gourianova, 2012). The central theme of the constructionist is that international politics are shaped by the ideas, social identities and culture. It also urges that the international reality is constructed socially by the cognitive structures. Imperialism just refers to how a country exploits its powers in the acquisition of new territories mostly based on colonialism. Through imperialism state of anarchy is achieved to the concerned state since it involves the collapse of the state to under colonialism. Liberalism also believes that the international system is anarchic in that anarchy can be regulated mostly by liberal democratization or by liberal institutionalism. 

Through fairly conducted relations in trading between the states, it is usually difficult for both states to induce war among them since it will lead to weak economic development in the both states. Hence according to the liberal proposition is that hope for the world peace is there even under the anarchy. Liberals also tend to think that the gain for power is achieved through war or threats of the military action. Realism advocates that the primary objective of the state is for the survival and also to maximize power to preserve their jurisdiction may range widely depending on the conflict that the country is experiencing (Barkin, 2010). Marxist rejects realists and liberal view of state conflict or the corporation and instead focuses the theory of international relations to the economic and the material aspect through Marxism theory on the economic motivation the theory of liberalism is suppressed since Marxism advocates for the equitable distribution of economy and equipment. 

Women are great beings in leadership; the way of the ruling of women is entirely different from that of men. Women in most parts of the world are viewed to be vulnerable as most of the men take part in leadership and despise the leadership done by women (Duflo, 2012). Several reasons have been given as to why the women do not take part in leadership, these include; women are not capable of doing the works required at the top, women also do not have the desires to beat the last thing is that the structural impediments are preventing women from reaching the top (Ibarra, Carter & Silva, 2010). Women usually hold stronger than men due to policy and social reforms. If the rate of women in leadership would be increased, the state will improve it standard. 

The state of anarchy in many countries has been led by wars and greed for power by several states. This state causes suffering in the affected country in poor social, political and economic growth. Marxism advocates for financial motivation to that of liberalism since it involves the promotion of fair trading among the states. The leadership of women should also be improved to run the world well 

References 

Barkin, J. S. (2010). Realist constructivism: Rethinking international relations theory . Cambridge University Press. 

Duflo, E. (2012). Women empowerment and economic development. Journal of Economic Literature , 50 (4), 1051-1079. 

Gourianova, N. (2012). The aesthetics of anarchy: art and ideology in the early Russian avant-garde . University of California Press. 

Ibarra, H., Carter, N. M., & Silva, C. (2010). Why men still get more promotions than women. Harvard Business Review , 88 (9), 80-85.