... in hand with the collapse of the habitual institutions (from sovereign nation states to classical capitalism). This is a crisis scenario that leads not so much to a new balance as to an all-out reset of the institutions, power, production modes, and international relations. But even though this model wins over by a promise of breaking the mould, it was mostly confined to journalistic and academic writings.
The second model seems more familiar. It suggests building a new bipolarity. Until not a very long time ago, it was courting much scepticism merely by virtue of there being no adequate candidates for the role of the second pole. Unlike multipolarity with its non-explicit rivalry and competition, bipolarity implies ...
... your commentary
Dear friend,
Thank you again for your vast commentary. Although I can’t understand all your enmity towards political science, I appreciate your opinion.
However I have some questions.
Your commentary was mostly against bipolarity, and maybe, to some extent, I may agree that it is not that all-embracing. But should I then try to focus on multipolarity, or unipolarity?
I’m not sure that I will change my paper right now (my advisor was quite all right with it),...
Dear Reader!
I have no intention to disappoint you or annoy you in case you were honestly looking for something about bipolarity in international relations, so this post will be dedicated, in some measure, to the well-known concept of ‘bipolarity’- and problems that lie beneath.
Here you will find a blog post (within a blog post), written by Fox (not a doctor yet) and ...
