You are searching about How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism, today we will share with you article about How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism was compiled and edited by our team from many sources on the internet. Hope this article on the topic How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism is useful to you.
Philosophy of the Economy Part Two
A probable historical period when under the circumstances particular individual skills were considered productive for a society or country thus the society or country’s tolerated and promoted such individual competition to maintain internal stability and advance in the regional or international competition.
Usually changing CILOD are painful processes of changing classes’ structure and redistribution of wealth thus wars, revolutions and social unrest have been a good indicator for changing CILOD. The approaching new CILOD is prompted by the new valued individual skills and knowledge needed under the new developments for a society or country to maintain internal stability and advance internationally;
Two things are of high importance at this time of change from one CILOD to another the Real Possibilities which reflect the socio-economic developments of a CILOD and also the Individuals Expectations which at time of change are getting higher: there is a relation between these two Relativities thus they usually closely follow one another: the expending Real Possibilities unlashes the constant Individual Desires for greater freedom of competition: the general direction of such competition is directed by the Real Possibilities and the current at the time possible spheres of competition: thus if we go back in history at feudal times the Individual Desires were much different from these in the 18 Century Empires of Europe and these from 20 Century Japan and even further different from the Post Wars Most Developed Countries;
The Philosophy of the Economy distinguishes and summarize these differences to show a very particular patterns in the world history which until now have been seen from other angles; by showing such changes it capitalizes of the constantly expanding role of the Individual Intellectual Abilities and the new historical role they are to play in the constantly changing new world.
From another side if societies-countries do not adapt to the emerging new socio-economic accents they may loose competitiveness and even further disintegrate and become unstable.
Philosophy of the Economy is a philosophical conception of locating the historical CILOD and the related Individual /for individual countries/ Current Levels of Development and thus showing a different way of such evaluations from the used socio-economic philosophical conceptions up to date. This new way is progressively distinguishing itself from socio-economic ideologies, nationalism, racism or any products of the Scarce Resources Economics philosophies; it is founded on the most recent socio-economic changes in the Worlds Markets and establishes a new conception for sustained market development for the Most Developed Countries and Blocks and for any other countries and even individuals into the new Globalizing Market and World.
The history of the world is a history of changing priorities of the role of individuals in societies: the Individual Desire to Compete for socio economic success as a natural human reaction in life and Societies’ from other side have established cultural and regulatory systems to keep this competition under acceptable limits..
There are many faces of competition changing historically but the progression is traceable from more physical which dominated human relations throughout centuries toward a more intellectual exploding sharply in the recent history: The Individual Competition for economic and social status well established and distinguishable in the most developed countries and markets has been growing into a Global competition as a result of new political and economic Global situation and the intellectualization of this competition. The importance of the Intellectual Property and Intellectuality over all has grown from internal for the most developed countries to international. The power of this kind of competition is fueled by the Internet and the political freedoms around the world allowing communications, free travel and overall free business relations. The energy of individual physical competition has been losing essence and the individual intellectual competition has been gaining power. These changes could be traced historically from the time of the primitive societies, countries and empires when Individual physical strength has been losing importance to individual organizational ones when skills and knowledge has been gaining importance: thus the values of what was important one time was not very much that important another time. As an example with the inventions of more distant weapons physical overpowering lost its importance. This process of intellectualization of priorities has been at its best for the last 100 years in the most developed societies and countries which obviously had established the best environment for the most adventitious tendencies to materialize. Declines of ones and changes of power from a country or a region to another almost always is a consequence of pour adaptability to the newly developing priorities of the change of one CILOD with another. In the past these processes of changes were much slower pace then recent ones therefore some societies, countries, empires in the past existed for centuries without changes; now days’ changes are very quick so countries adopt their laws and regulations quite frequently to maintain stability.
The allowance to individual to compete in societies has expended for a short time as never before by overpowering the existing ideologies and classes’ structures.
When someone reads about competition as the way societies were formed and built it starts looking like a jungle out there but in reality life is not a jungle because of human culture and religions, these social tools are for balancing civility and keeping Individuals close to God and almost all religions have been promoting modesty and positive for the societies values?
Human culture has been built by accumulating human experience and retaining social rules which have become part of everyday principles for acceptable individual behavior.
Social inequalities and the negative social powers coming from the socio-economic injustice have been offset by individuals accepting the realities of such social injustice by the Social Order. The negative energies as a result of ongoing social injustice have been redirected into basic nationalism and chauvinism or into more sophisticated ideologies of communism or capitalism, or religious fundamentalism. The suppression of individuals by the governments to protect the higher more adventitious classes is the way how modern societies were built; this was the way to maintain Social Stability and eventually for the most developed nations to maintain their status. Ever until most recent developments in the Global economy for societies to be successful they must had been Socially Stable and such was succeeded by the combination of free market and social order we have to differentiate Social Order from Market Order which is a generally socio-economic tool becoming possible as a consequence of the recent technological-political-global market integration and acceleration. Social Order had been ruling the societies up to now, a consequence of the pro supply economies based on scarce resources under low productivity and international aggression Social Order’s philosophy was therefore to limit the individual competition for socio-economic success to limited number of individuals who controlled big businesses and majority share of the national wealth; an approach quite beneficiary in such an environment. Social Order was needed to suppress a pointless for the CILOD individual competition thus the societies could balance the deficiencies of low productivity and technologies, part of the Social Order included also the classes division and constant wars and imperialistic aggression: which impact on the societies was similar: to maintain Social Stability. Mostly physical competition with low productivity, and international instability were to be offset by the Social Order and its Socio-Economic Tools.
Socio-economic structures of the Most Developed Nations under such environment reflected at its best such limitations and at the same time gave opportunities of more then the Less Developed Nations individuals to participate in the socio-economic competition; the Social Order suppressed the individual competition using socio-economic tools the Market Order suppresses individual competition using market tools; Market Order is a consequence of intellectual competition of the globalizing world overall plays similar to the Social Order role but it is based on Current Market Limitations: those limitations are pretty much a Demand to Supply relativity called Market Relativity: the always fluctuating market forces, progressively expanding Market of Individual Competition will break the existing Social Order in the Most Developed Markets and grow up into a Market Order into these Markets relativity which will expand and grow up into a global relativity of a Global Market..
The Global Intellectualization brings on a Global scale much different environment that substantially differs from the currently existing market environment; such change will effect all spheres of business and chance Economics fundamentally:
Let’s compare this new development on the Global marketplace to the braking of royalties in Europe after the great wars or to the dismembering of the Great Empires.
There will be two main factors of Globalization: one is the Global Intellectualization of Competition and second is the Global Integration of Investment. And because the enhancing access of individual competition medium to small companies and individual investors will be able to directly invest and provide services or product around the globe which by itself will limit the currently existing Global corporations to services and products requiring bigger resources to develop: some of the recent business and investment conglomerates will adapt under the new conditions other will disappear but they will loose the grip on the international market to the medium to small businesses and investors as these last flexibilities and adaptabilities will provide them with major advantages.
Employment market will transform from full time employment into free lance employment. Actually, self-employment will become major employment globally.
In this kind of socio-economic environment the role of the governments in Economics will change from historically protecting higher classes and big business to regulatory of protecting free market competition.
Global terrorism is most definitely the biggest threat to the market and intellectual globalization: it is the new menace of the future, but I believe if the market forces are let to work the abilities of the religious fundamentalists to recruit will be much more limited. Current isolation from fair competition of millions of people around the world has brought wars and revolutions and finally it has brought the Global terrorism and religious fundamentalism. There is an International Level of Expectations which also is traceable historically which off balance always provoke rebellious motions. The Possible Current International Level of Development based on the current technological and socio-economic structures allows much more advance structures of engaging more individuals into productive competition. The current Level of Expectations reflects the disharmony between possibilities People feel it, it is out there and the suppression of the individuals from participating in it provokes resistance; religious fundamentalists are just using this in their ways to steer troubles. If current governments of the Most Developed Countries and Economic Blocks do not release the pressure and establish a fair individual market competition the consequences could be disastrous. Historically the most recent situation in the world is comparable to the fall of world great Spanish and Austro Hungarian empires when they could not adopt to the new developing conditions; to the Russian revolution and First and Second Great Wars: always in each of these occasions a serious socio-economic development could be traced where the Individual Expectations for /fair/ Competition to a CILOD were not met, and social pressure erupted into violence. It is also obvious that these processes have been accelerating and changes are more frequent now days. The World is becoming a boiling place of energies and individual expectations are running higher and higher. There is a great opportunity these energies to be used in a creative competitive environment if Most Developed Countries’ Governments promote these new tendencies and generally people understand that the old Economics of Scare Resources is expiring when a Market driven pro balance between Demand to Supply Economics is emerging. Life as it is today will give place to these new developments.
Why Ideologies are not relevant anymore on the Global market place?
Well, ideologies and nationalism served well Most Developed Countries through History by maintaining Social Stability and as motivation social tool for their citizens, also as a tool of propaganda of their values. Obviously the values of the Most Developed Countries especially at the last 50 years have been most of the time more progressive promoting pro individual freedoms and open markets which by itself had had a positive effect on the Global scale. Before this they were much more protective of their own interests; imperialism and militarism were part of it: at that time the Global market did not almost exist except for them and the productivity was such low that appropriation of foreign resource was pretty much the only way for gaining economic and political power, therefore militarism, imperialism and economics were very well embodied together. In any point in History the most developed societies have in some way been advance of the rest so if some methods or policies we now consider inhumane and unacceptable, at the time there were justifiable to maintain dominance. In the modern history as it was mentioned before so many times political leaders misunderstood the reality and currently most productive socio-economic tools and raged wars, genocide and devastation: examples are countless such as Germany and Japan in the Second World War and Russia and China through the Cold War. Ideologies and mindless waist of resources in the last Century were synonymous. The politicians and lobbyists have been the best promoters of ideologies because these were serving them the most. In recent times in the Most Developed Countries anti corruption and pro humane politics is increasing which is a part of the coming new level of development. Same tendencies of cleaning the financial sector are in progress where tolerance for shadow operations and transactions is decreasing. The expectations for politicians and business leaders’ behavior and actions by the public are demanding. Ideologies are losing their impact on foreign and domestic policies until the September, 11 2001 which terrorist act was followed by revival of new wave of ideologies; Religious fundamentalism from one side with its seemingly irrational demands and propaganda and the US and other Most Developed Countries Governments from another side locating a new purpose to exist and appropriate more powers over the individuals’ freedoms. Governments strive on ideologies which is a best weapon to explain mismanagement and mistakes by them. Terrorism is probably the biggest set back in the post war history, even bigger then the Cold war because then the enemies were known and there ware political exchanges between them when the terrorism is an underground resistance with no clear cause and unrealistic demands.
What has prompted this new level of development and why it is different from the previous ones?
The change from a Scarce Resources Economics to a Market Economics has begun with the improvement of the socio-economic structures which have given the fields for technological and political revolutions: the values of the free market competition and the individual freedoms have been penetrating country after country and even in some like China individual freedoms are still far from complete just the freedom to do business has open a lot of doors for individual competition; the Internet and the ability of more individuals to participate in virtual educational programs or to self educate, and to exchange ideas and thoughts; the political freedom of the Eastern Block countries which followed up by some of them becoming members of EC; country like Bulgaria has virtually built up a crediting system overnight with staggering yearly growth; the powerful intellectual revolution in India which enhanced education and high tech employment, the politically stable governments in South America and Asia, and the most important the first time in history decentralization of the global investment and the intellectual competition which has come with the internet and which could not be controlled by only Developed Countries and Blocks or by other Governments.
Life as it was is gone: in the new World the most advance countries and blocks will be the one which value individual freedoms and intellectual properties. The most valuable resources are not scarce anymore because they are Intellectual and if some of the richest men on the planet are getting there using Intellectual properties obviously the price of becoming wealthy and successful does not anymore relates manufacturing, or providing services or even financing business there are higher businesses and they are the intellectual properties related ones. The materialization of row ideas is becoming very fast which by the way is going to be the business of the Future itself. From ideas to materialization back to ideas: constantly improving technologies in all spheres.
What becomes priority for a country if it is to maintain or achieve most developed status?
The way individuals compete for status countries and economic blocks compete too; may be in some future it will change when the individuals will become dominant in this competition but this is still in the future for now countries will compete for domination.
US Scarce Resources Economics and the capitalistic social philosophy was based on the competition and relatively free unregulated market and a government protecting and promoting the status quo of classes’ division and big business limiting social investment and wealth redistribution as business not friendly economic tools which system was very advance for its time placing US on the top of the Most Developed Countries now with the newer changes of priorities such success will be achieved by adjusting to the new occurrences and developments of the Market Relativity by providing more individual to
· access to better education,
· better social conditions of everyday life,
· personal freedoms,
· improving and maintaining infrastructure in particular communications and public transportations,
· environmentally friendly energies and products,
· racial and lower classes integration, freedom of business but very strict business regulatory system against corruption and fraud:
· expending regularly adjusted to the inflation Social Security and Medicare
· heavily regulated stock and commodity exchanges expending Globally
· Associating countries around the World in integrated business and investment under the same regulatory system.
All of this could be summarized with Market Stability of the Market Economics which is replacing the Social Stability of the Scarce Resources Economics.
To control a pro social system without socializing the economics and creating huge bureaucracy a country must use the new tools of economics and monetary policies.
There is a change in valuation of equity: the new security coming off a regulated and in the same time ever expending markets provides more security of more assets considered equities then the old system. To consider an asset equity it must have relative security; when the system of Scarce Resources Capitalism relied on deregulations to stimulate business and at the same time created insecurity and this approach devaluated assets and the value of the whole country as all. Changing the system will change the securities and allow expansion of the current Monetary policies without devaluation of the currencies; and when such approaches is applied on a Global scale it becomes scary expandable.
What about if such prosperity double and triple the world population and creates food and other shortages and environmental disasters?
It is a very legit question and for this we can go even back to Socrates with him asking if an educated individual is a better individual and the answer could be “no” may be not, but historically the biggest damages to the environment and the overpopulation has always been done by less developed and freedom deprived nations and even in the most developed one the urbanization usually reduced the number of children per family, the education or as we can say the intellectualization of more people and the new opportunities involving these people in the Global competition will possibly reduce the risk form overcrowding or environmental disasters then increase the current one.
The Market Stability is not necessary that stable do not be leaded by the terminology; volatility in the worlds markets will not cease to exist in the contrary the regulations needed to maintain Market Stability will increase the reliability of the exchanges that by itself will accelerate Global investment overall increasing the current trading values multiple times: the more comprehensive and reliable information provided by the companies and brokerages will encourage more investors to step in on a Global scale: fraud is the main reason a lot of investors even today to not trade; and finally, the new monetary policies of the Market Stability will increase the Monetary Supplies obviously putting more money out there for trading.
If M supplies are increased would it not provoke inflationary forces and devaluation of the currencies?
The quantities of Monetary Supply in a Market Stability Competition is based on a different formulas accumulating Demand to Supply ratios /not other way around/ where the Demand is a comprehensive break down of market tools reasoning the evaluation of the currency; Market value of a currency will reflect the positive circulation of it /the currency/ which is based on the consequent value per unit: lets make an example if you turn around 1$ under a fair market competition and its value becomes $2 in one month the an additional $0.50 could be put in circulation without provoking inflationary or deflationary forces: until now the physical value of a country such as real estate equity, the final manufacturing and services production equity and savings equity which are mostly reflection of somehow physical possession of a sort and low LTV of the intellectual properties and investment have measured the Monetary Policies and this is because the value of the currencies was measured by these kind of equities but in the Market Stability Economics there will be more secured tools of economics providing value and therefore the perception for equity will change; such new tools are the investment in intellectual properties /the intellectual property equity/, in Regional and Global Development /the investment equity/, the business value which on a Regional and Global scale /the business equity/, a Country Infrastructure, a country Medicare infrastructure and etc. are considered equity too: all of these partially are considered economic tools now but because of the limitations of the market security even internally because of the ongoing non transparency hazardous approaches of the current exchanges and the Government deficit, and overall high insecurity their LTV or Money to Value are very low. Again Market Stability Economics is based on high Global growth which will raise the margins and on very heavy market regulations minimizing fraudulent practices and therefore providing higher security on more Intellectual and Investment equities therefore the value of the intellectual properties and of the invested capital will be considered higher LTV and MTV equity. These new equity will change the Monetary policies and the approach toward inflationary and deflationary forces as well; therefore more money will circulate and more business will be done over all, much more. Anything that contributes to a positive Market competition will be considered “equity” and could be supported by the Monetary Policies. Finally, the distribution of Wealth under the new conditions will differ substantially from the current one: the intellectualization of individual competition will give the opportunities to millions of people to participate in a Global competition; best organized and well maintained Small to Medium Businesses and Investor will benefit substantially from such developments therefore a lot of industries which could be done by using new technologies will expand indiscriminately but some of the business still be done by the internationals, anyway self-employment and free lancing will be increasing share on the employment market..
How the economics is changing from manufacturing and service related into intellectual and investment related?
Simply here is an example: “If one has enough security in a Latin American country to buy a well located property or invest into medium to small business the value of such investment coming from US could be multiple time as the value of a similar investment here in US because of the difference income generating and standard of life. The return on a business in this area compare to the invested capital is higher too. The missing link is market security in this Latin American Country” well the same example applies to local US securities: the shady speculative practices by the current regulations stop many investors from using the tools of investment for profit thus many are doing their own small enterprises in many cases not relating their experience and education. Small investors are feeling very insecure on the current Market exchanges as well.
The Scares’ Resources Philosophy of the capitalism is pro supply emphasizing on the business side; supported by politicians and lobbyists this ideology still rules: the fragmental business regulations and requirements bring the worst in many business people and businesses. The Scares’ Resources Ideology capitalize on such shady practices as stimulating business and over all economy: so called Trickle Down Economics thus Economic flexibilities is maintained by cutting employees benefits and insurance, by relocating or even worse as Enron by skimming billions but overall it is better for business; From another side the Socialized Economics of many countries basically entitling Governments to distribute high percentages of their GNP’s shows very inflexible and insufficient structures product of Scares’ resources ideologies too, in this case protecting the societies from individual competition: in this kinds of Economics doing business is very difficult and very risky.
Market Stability Economics is a free market competition under heavy common law regulations: the overhead control shall be done by the federal courts when the Government shall be represented by the district attorneys. The current Tax System should be simplified either by across the board Sales Tax or very simple Federal Tax; the Globalization of the Market will be best controlled by a Sales Tax. The labor laws should be simplified promoting self employment thus the contracts should be enforceable with no large expenses: actually a whole number of laws should regulate the warding and structure of all business contracts to make them easy enforceable, the payments of contracts should be easily enforceable with a full recourse to the company’s officers. The system should be enforceable Globally as said before which should not differ in any way from all participants. All rules must be fair to all participants.
The major difference of the new system is that the internal for US regulation have to apply Globally thus no country should be allowed to participate on the US market without full compliance similar to the practices of EU expansion under the common rules and regulations. The biggest mistake NAFTA made is not requiring from Mexico to follow the same regulations as the US companies did. As an example of right policies was the requested by EU to all candidate members to adapt numbers laws and regulations from anti corruption ones to anti pollution and energy preservation ones. Which policies is helping those countries to establish more stable markets and these policies have already lifted multi times the International Investment to those candidate and new members countries. EU in the other side has shown an anti business bureaucracy and also a growing segregation between having and having not nations; nationalism and chauvinism are and will be the biggest obstacle toward adapting the Market Stability Economics. US are much more advanced in integrating all kinds of people in its market.
The new Market Stability driven Economics cleaned up from business irregularities, shadow practices and violent market fluctuation should be more productive for business and individuals alike: the upcoming Intellectual Revolution will open a new world of opportunities for many new people currently non productive: this new access will release some negative pressures and tendencies which will decrease the recruiting powers of the Religious fundamentalists or mindless fruitless ideologies. The process of these new tendencies to expand and realize themselves should be quite prompt if the new policies started being adapted by the Most Developed Countries and Markets. The fierce economic competition among these countries and economic blocks will not relinquish anyhow and there will not be any peace in the Global economic competition, the main difference of the new developments are better regulated economics which will higher the security of investment and intellectual properties, and business practices, it will allow a smother process of globalization, it will allow more peoples and countries to participate in the global competition, it will establish a better peaceful World by limiting the powers of the fundamentalism and other negative social ideologies.
Video about How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism
You can see more content about How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism on our youtube channel: Click Here
Question about How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism
If you have any questions about How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism, please let us know, all your questions or suggestions will help us improve in the following articles!
The article How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism was compiled by me and my team from many sources. If you find the article How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism helpful to you, please support the team Like or Share!
Rate Articles How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism
Rate: 4-5 stars
Search keywords How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism
How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism
way How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism
tutorial How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism
How Was The New Imperialism Different From The Old Imperialism free
#Philosophy #Economy #Part