Anarchical Society and Society of States | Edexcel A-Level Politics
Updated: Sep 29
For Specification 9PL0
Edexcel A-Level Politics | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time:Â 50 minutes
Anarchical society and society of states A-Level Politics revision examines how states can co-operate even though the global system has no overarching authority. Edexcel requires you to understand two linked ideas: first, that international politics remains anarchic, and second, that states can nevertheless develop an informal understanding based on norms and rules that increases trust and reciprocal behaviour. This approach is especially important because it combines an idea familiar from realism [Realism] with possibilities for co-operation that connect more closely to liberalism [Liberalism].
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define anarchical society and society of states.
Explain why the international system is described as anarchic despite the existence of co-operation.
Explain how norms and rules can create an informal understanding between states.
Analyse how greater trust can encourage reciprocal behaviour and co-operation.
Compare anarchical society and society of states theory with realism.
Compare anarchical society and society of states theory with liberalism.
Revision Notes đź“š
Anarchical society and society of states A-Level Politics revision: the core idea
The Edexcel specification defines anarchical society and society of states as the theory that:
states can be members of a society despite the anarchical nature of the international system.
This apparently contains a contradiction:
the system is anarchic
but states can still form a society
Understanding how both can be true at the same time is the key to the whole theory.
Edexcel identifies two central ideas:
There is anarchy in the global system, meaning the absence of an overarching authority.
States develop an informal understanding that creates a degree of co-operation, based on norms and rules that increase trust and reciprocal behaviour.
The theory therefore sits between two very different conclusions:
Anarchy exists
↓
but
↓
anarchy does not make co-operation impossible
This is why the theory is particularly useful after studying the differences between the two main theories [Realism and liberalism compared].
What does international anarchy mean?
The starting point is international anarchy.
Edexcel defines international anarchy as the idea that the world system is leaderless, with no universal sovereign or worldwide government.
This does not mean that the international system contains no order whatsoever.
It means that there is no single political authority standing above all sovereign states.
A simple comparison helps:
Within a state | International system |
A government exercises political authority | No worldwide government exercises supreme authority over all states |
Individuals exist beneath a recognised political authority | Sovereign states do not exist beneath a universal sovereign |
A hierarchy of political authority exists | The system lacks an overarching authority |
The international system is therefore anarchic because it lacks a superior political authority, not because every interaction between states is necessarily chaotic.
Anarchy without an overarching authority
The phrase absence of overarching authority is central to the specification.
An overarching authority would be an authority positioned above individual states and able to exercise political control over them.
Anarchical society theory accepts that no such universal authority exists.
Therefore:
states continue to exist
states remain separate political actors
no worldwide government rules them all
the international system remains anarchic
This gives the theory an important point of agreement with realism.
Realism also recognises international anarchy and its implications as a central feature of global politics.
However, agreeing that the system is anarchic does not mean the two approaches reach the same conclusion about what follows from anarchy.
Anarchy does not necessarily prevent society
This is the distinctive feature of anarchical society and society of states theory.
The theory accepts:
there is no overarching authority
but also argues:
states can nevertheless develop a degree of co-operation
The international system can therefore be simultaneously:
anarchic, because there is no universal sovereign
a society of states, because states develop informal understandings that make some co-operation possible
This is the crucial distinction to remember.
⚠️ A society of states is not the same as a world government.
States do not have to surrender the anarchic character of the international system in order to co-operate.
Instead, co-operation can develop between states despite the absence of a higher authority.
The informal understanding between states
Edexcel specifically says that states have an informal understanding that ensures a degree of co-operation.
The word informal matters.
The theory does not depend upon the creation of a universal government controlling states from above. Instead, states can develop shared expectations about how they will behave towards one another.
This informal understanding rests on four closely connected ideas:
norms
rules
trust
reciprocal behaviour
These concepts should be learnt as a chain rather than four disconnected definitions.
norms and rules → increased trust → reciprocal behaviour → degree of co-operation
Norms
Norms are shared expectations about appropriate behaviour.
Within an anarchical society, states can develop expectations about how states should behave towards one another even though no worldwide government has supreme authority over them.
The significance of norms is that repeated acceptance of expectations can make the behaviour of other states more predictable.
Without any shared expectations:
states may have greater uncertainty about one another
trust may be difficult to establish
co-operation may be harder to sustain
With norms:
states have some idea of what behaviour to expect
their relationships can become more predictable
trust has a greater opportunity to develop
The reasoning is therefore:
shared norms → greater predictability → increased trust → increased possibility of co-operation
Rules
The specification pairs norms and rules together.
Rules provide standards that states recognise within their interactions.
Like norms, their importance lies in creating expectations about behaviour.
The theory does not claim that a higher world government is required to impose all these understandings. States themselves can recognise and follow rules as members of a wider society of states.
This is important because it shows how:
anarchy can continue while order develops
There is no universal sovereign, yet the behaviour of states does not have to be entirely unregulated or unpredictable.
Norms and rules compared
Norms and rules have a similar function within the specification.
Norms | Rules |
Shared expectations about behaviour | Recognised standards shaping behaviour |
Help states understand what behaviour to expect | Help provide clearer expectations between states |
Can increase predictability | Can contribute to regular patterns of interaction |
Can help build trust | Can help build trust |
Support a degree of co-operation | Support a degree of co-operation |
For examination purposes, the most important point is their effect:
norms and rules can increase trust between states, which can lead to reciprocal behaviour and therefore greater co-operation.
Trust
Trust is the next stage of the argument.
If states repeatedly operate according to norms and rules, each state may become more confident that others will behave in ways it can anticipate.
This increases trust.
Trust is politically significant because states are more likely to co-operate when they believe other states will also respect their shared understandings.
The sequence is:
states recognise norms and rules
behaviour becomes more predictable
confidence in the behaviour of other states can increase
trust develops
states have stronger reasons to continue co-operating
Trust therefore provides the bridge between shared understandings and actual co-operative behaviour.
Reciprocal behaviour
The specification says norms and rules can increase trust and reciprocal behaviour.
Reciprocal behaviour means behaviour that is returned or responded to in a similar way.
In the context of co-operation:
one state behaves co-operatively
another responds co-operatively
that response can encourage the first state to continue co-operating
This creates a reinforcing pattern.
For example, in a simplified scenario:
State A follows an agreed rule
↓
State B gains greater confidence in State A
↓
State B also follows the rule
↓
State A's trust increases
↓
both have greater incentive to continue co-operating
The important point is not the specific scenario. It is the general mechanism:
co-operative behaviour can encourage further co-operative behaviour.
How reciprocity can reinforce co-operation
Reciprocity helps explain why co-operation can continue without a worldwide government.
If states expect co-operation to be returned, they gain a reason to continue behaving co-operatively.
The relationship can become self-reinforcing:
norms and rules
↓
trust
↓
reciprocal behaviour
↓
further trust
↓
continued co-operation
This does not mean that all states will always co-operate.
The specification uses deliberately cautious wording. It says that the informal understanding ensures a degree of co-operation.
That phrase matters enormously.
Anarchical society theory does not require:
perfect agreement
complete trust
universal harmony
the disappearance of conflict
an end to international anarchy
It argues only that meaningful co-operation can exist despite anarchy.
The relationship between anarchy and co-operation
The most important relationship to understand is:
Anarchy and co-operation are not opposites.
A state system can lack an overarching authority while still developing norms, rules and patterns of reciprocal behaviour.
This produces the theory's full chain of reasoning:
There is no overarching political authority.
The international system is therefore anarchic.
States nevertheless interact with one another.
They can develop informal understandings.
These understandings are based on norms and rules.
Norms and rules make behaviour more predictable.
Predictability can increase trust.
Trust can encourage reciprocal behaviour.
Reciprocal behaviour can sustain a degree of co-operation.
States can therefore form a society of states despite international anarchy.
This is the key analytical chain for the entire lesson.
Why "society of states" matters
The term society of states captures the idea that states are more than completely isolated actors.
They remain politically separate, and no overarching authority governs them, but their interactions can be shaped by common understandings.
A society of states therefore combines:
independence
with
interaction and co-operation
The theory's importance is that it avoids two extreme conclusions:
anarchy does not automatically mean that meaningful co-operation is impossible
co-operation does not automatically mean that anarchy has disappeared
That makes it useful when comparing the more pessimistic implications of realism with the greater optimism of liberalism.
Anarchical society compared with realism
Anarchical society theory and realism share an important starting point.
Agreement: the international system is anarchic
Both recognise the absence of an overarching authority.
Realism identifies international anarchy and its implications as one of its main ideas. Anarchical society theory similarly accepts that there is anarchy in the global system.
Therefore:
Realism:Â international anarchy exists.
Anarchical society:Â international anarchy exists.
The disagreement concerns what follows.
Difference: what are the implications of anarchy?
Realism places much greater emphasis on:
states as key actors
the balance of power
insecurity
the security dilemma
the inevitability of war
Anarchical society theory accepts anarchy but argues that states can nevertheless develop an informal understanding based on norms and rules.
The contrast is therefore:
Realism | Anarchical society and society of states |
Accepts international anarchy | Accepts international anarchy |
States remain key actors | States remain the members of the society |
Anarchy has major implications for power and security | Anarchy does not prevent states developing informal understandings |
Security dilemma can increase tension | Norms and rules can increase trust |
War is inevitable | A degree of co-operation can develop |
Emphasises conflict among actors pursuing power | Emphasises the possibility of society despite anarchy |
The 2024 mark scheme for Paper 3B explicitly recognised this overlap, identifying realist agreement with the theory over the existence of anarchy and the absence of a higher authority.
Why anarchical society is not simply realism
A common mistake is to stop at the fact that both accept international anarchy.
That misses the central difference.
Realist chain:
international anarchy → insecurity → security dilemma → tension → conflict
Anarchical society chain:
international anarchy → informal understanding → norms and rules → trust → reciprocal behaviour → degree of co-operation
Both begin with anarchy, but they emphasise very different possible consequences.
That distinction gives you an excellent structure for AO2 analysis.
Anarchical society compared with liberalism
Anarchical society theory also shares important features with liberalism.
Liberalism emphasises:
the possibility of harmony and balance
complex interdependence
global governance
the impact and growth of international organisations
mutual benefits and co-operation
Both liberalism and anarchical society theory therefore reject the idea that international politics must consist entirely of conflict.
Agreement: co-operation is possible
This is their clearest similarity.
Liberalism:Â international relations can involve mutual benefits and co-operation.
Anarchical society:Â states can develop a degree of co-operation through norms, rules, trust and reciprocal behaviour.
Both therefore challenge the strongest realist conclusion that the international system must inevitably produce continuing conflict.
The 2024 mark scheme identified this overlap, noting that liberalism is closer to anarchical society theory in accepting the possibility that states can develop common understandings and co-operative relationships.
Difference between liberalism and anarchical society
The similarity does not make the theories identical.
Their emphasis is different.
The main liberal ideas in the specification focus on:
morality and optimism about human nature
harmony and balance
complex interdependence
global governance
international organisations
Anarchical society theory focuses instead on:
continuing international anarchy
absence of overarching authority
informal understanding between states
norms and rules
trust
reciprocal behaviour
Therefore:
Liberalism | Anarchical society and society of states |
Emphasises optimism about human nature and morality | Begins explicitly by accepting international anarchy |
Emphasises complex interdependence | Emphasises informal understanding between states |
Emphasises global governance | Emphasises norms and rules despite the lack of overarching authority |
Emphasises international organisations | Emphasises trust and reciprocal behaviour |
Co-operation can create harmony and balance | Co-operation can exist within an anarchic state system |
The clearest difference is one of starting point and emphasis.
Liberalism highlights the conditions that make greater integration and co-operation possible. Anarchical society theory asks how a society of states can exist while the international system remains anarchic.
Why the theory sits between realism and liberalism
Anarchical society and society of states theory can be understood as sharing an important feature with each of the two major approaches.
It shares with realism:
acceptance of international anarchy and the absence of overarching authority.
It shares with liberalism:
acceptance that co-operation between states is possible.
This produces a useful three-way comparison:
Issue | Realism | Anarchical society | Liberalism |
International anarchy | Central idea | Explicitly accepted | Greater emphasis is placed on interdependence and governance |
States | Key actors | States form the society | States operate within complex interdependence |
Co-operation | Limited by power competition and insecurity | Possible through informal understanding | Possible through mutual benefits and interdependence |
Basis of co-operation | Not a central realist expectation | Norms, rules, trust and reciprocity | Morality, harmony, interdependence, governance and organisations |
Conflict | War is inevitable | Anarchy can coexist with a degree of co-operation | Harmony and balance are possible |
International order | Shaped by states, power and security | Can develop within anarchy through shared understandings | Can develop through co-operation and global governance |
This comparison should build directly on Realism and liberalism compared [Realism and liberalism compared].
Anarchy, norms and rules as a middle position
The theory is particularly useful because it separates two questions that are sometimes incorrectly treated as the same:
Question 1: Is there a worldwide government above states?
No. The system remains anarchic.
Question 2: Can states nevertheless follow shared expectations and co-operate?
Yes. Norms and rules can create trust and reciprocal behaviour.
Therefore:
absence of government ≠absence of all order
and:
co-operation ≠end of anarchy
This distinction is the heart of the theory.
Comparing the three approaches through order
One way to organise an examination answer is around the question of how order is possible.
Realism
Order exists within a system of sovereign states where power, security and the balance of power remain fundamental.
The absence of an overarching authority creates insecurity, and the security dilemma helps explain why conflict persists.
Anarchical society and society of states
Order can emerge from an informal understanding among states.
Norms and rules increase trust and reciprocal behaviour, allowing a degree of co-operation without creating a universal government.
Liberalism
Order can increasingly emerge from co-operation, complex interdependence, global governance and the growth of international organisations.
This comparison demonstrates that all three approaches can start with the same world of interacting states but interpret the possibilities for order differently.
Comparing the three approaches through security and conflict
The perspectives also differ over what international relationships mean for conflict.
Realism:
anarchy → insecurity → security dilemma → conflict
Anarchical society:
anarchy → norms and rules → trust → reciprocity → degree of co-operation
Liberalism:
interdependence → mutual benefit → co-operation → harmony and balance
This makes anarchical society theory particularly interesting because it does not require the international system to cease being anarchic before co-operation becomes possible.
Informal co-operation versus overarching authority
You should be especially precise about the difference between co-operation and authority.
States may co-operate because they recognise shared norms and rules.
That does not necessarily mean:
a higher authority has been created
sovereignty has disappeared
the international system has stopped being anarchic
The entire theory depends upon maintaining this distinction.
If an overarching worldwide authority existed, the central puzzle of anarchical society theory would disappear. The theory matters precisely because states can form a society without one.
A model chain of analysis
For an exam, one of the strongest ways to explain the theory is through a developed chain:
The international system remains anarchic because there is no overarching authority above states. However, this does not mean states cannot develop order. States can form informal understandings based on norms and rules. These make behaviour more predictable and can therefore increase trust. Increased trust encourages reciprocal behaviour, because states have stronger reasons to respond to co-operation with further co-operation. Consequently, a society of states can develop even though the international system remains anarchic.
That covers the central specification requirement without introducing unnecessary material.
Applying the comparison in an examination
This topic is particularly suited to direct comparative analysis.
The 2024 Paper 3B mark scheme rewarded students for comparing anarchical society theory directly with realism and liberalism, rather than treating each approach as an isolated body of knowledge.
A useful paragraph structure is:
Identify the point of comparison.
Explain what anarchical society theory argues.
Compare this directly with realism or liberalism.
Explain the significance of the difference.
For example:
Point:Â International anarchy.
Anarchical society:Â There is no overarching authority.
Realism:Â Agrees that the international system is anarchic.
Significance:Â The perspectives then divide over its consequences, because realism links anarchy to insecurity and conflict while anarchical society theory argues that norms and rules can still sustain a degree of co-operation.
This is much stronger than writing one paragraph explaining realism and a second unrelated paragraph explaining anarchical society.
Preparing for the next lesson
Once you understand the comparative theories themselves, the next task is to use them to interpret actual developments.
You will do this in applying the theories to developments since 2000Â [Applying comparative theories to global politics since 2000].
For this topic, make sure you can answer four questions before moving on:
Why is the international system anarchic?
Why does anarchy not necessarily prevent co-operation?
How do norms and rules generate trust and reciprocal behaviour?
Which parts of the theory resemble realism, and which resemble liberalism?
If you can explain those relationships rather than merely define the terms, you have the core of this lesson secure.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Anarchical society and society of states | The theory that states can form a society even though the international system remains anarchic. | Use it to explain how anarchy and co-operation can exist at the same time. |
International anarchy | A leaderless international system with no universal sovereign or worldwide government. | Use it to explain the theory's point of agreement with realism. |
Norms | Shared expectations between states about appropriate behaviour. | Explain how they can make behaviour more predictable and increase trust. |
Trust | Confidence that other states will broadly follow shared understandings and expected behaviour. | Link norms and rules to greater willingness to co-operate. |
Reciprocal behaviour | Behaviour in which co-operation by one state encourages a similar co-operative response from another. | Use it to explain how co-operation can become self-reinforcing despite international anarchy. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports đź’ˇ
Examiner hint:Â Develop concepts rather than merely naming them. The 2020 examiner report praised candidates who explained how anarchy, security and interdependence produced different consequences instead of simply defining the theories.
Examiner hint:Â Make direct comparisons. Examiner feedback from comparative-theory questions shows that weaker answers often describe one perspective and then another, while stronger responses maintain a clear analytical comparison.
Examiner hint:Â Keep the precise focus of the question throughout your answer. The 2025 report identified sustained focus as an important discriminator between weaker description and stronger analysis. Apply that same principle here by continually returning to anarchy, co-operation, norms, rules, trust or reciprocity, depending on the wording of the question.
Examiner hint:Â Remember synoptic links when the compulsory comparative-theories question requires them. The 2023 examiner report noted that candidates who omitted the required synoptic element could not reach the highest level.
Examiner hint:Â Accurate knowledge should underpin AO2 rather than replace it. Explain the consequence of each point, for example, norms make behaviour more predictable, which can increase trust, which in turn makes reciprocal co-operation more likely.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Treating international anarchy as complete chaos
Why this is incorrect: International anarchy means that there is no universal sovereign or worldwide government. Anarchical society theory specifically argues that a degree of co-operation can exist despite this.
How to improve: Define anarchy first as absence of overarching authority, then explain how norms and rules can still produce order.
Mistake: Assuming that a society of states requires a world government
Why this is incorrect: The theory is significant precisely because states can form a society despite the anarchic nature of the international system.
How to improve: Remember the contrast: society without overarching government.
Mistake: Confusing anarchical society with anarchism
Why this is incorrect: They are different areas of the Edexcel course. Anarchical society and society of states is a theory of global politics concerning relations between states. Anarchism is a political ideology studied as one of the non-core Political Ideas options.
How to improve: Associate anarchical society with states, international anarchy, norms and co-operation.
Mistake: Listing norms, rules, trust and reciprocity without explaining the relationship
Why this is incorrect: The specification connects these ideas in a clear causal sequence.
How to improve: Learn the chain:
norms and rules → trust → reciprocal behaviour → degree of co-operation
Mistake: Saying anarchical society rejects realism completely
Why this is incorrect: The theory shares realism's acceptance that the global system is anarchic and lacks an overarching authority.
How to improve: Compare in two stages: first identify the agreement over anarchy, then explain the difference over whether co-operation can emerge from norms and rules.
Mistake: Treating anarchical society as identical to liberalism
Why this is incorrect: Both allow for co-operation, but their emphasis differs. Liberalism stresses morality, harmony, complex interdependence, global governance and international organisations. Anarchical society theory begins from the continuing absence of overarching authority and focuses on informal understandings, norms, rules, trust and reciprocal behaviour.
How to improve: Remember: liberalism emphasises growing co-operation, anarchical society explains how co-operation can exist while anarchy remains.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Questions
1. Define international anarchy. (1 mark)
2. Define anarchical society and society of states. (2 marks)
3. Explain one way in which norms can contribute to co-operation between states. (4 marks)
4. Explain the relationship between rules, trust and reciprocal behaviour within an anarchical society. (6 marks)
5. Consider the following scenario:
State A and State B recognise the same informal rule governing their relationship. State A follows the rule even though no higher authority forces it to do so. State B responds by following the rule as well. Both states become more confident that the other will continue to behave in the same way.
Using the scenario, analyse how anarchical society and society of states theory explains the development of co-operation. (6 marks)
6. Analyse the similarities and differences between realism and anarchical society and society of states theory. In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas. (12 marks)
7. Analyse the similarities and differences between liberalism and anarchical society and society of states theory. In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas. (12 marks)
8. Analyse how realism, liberalism and anarchical society and society of states theory provide different explanations of international order and co-operation. In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas. (12 marks)
Answers and mark scheme
1. Define international anarchy. (1 mark)
Award 1 mark for:
a leaderless international system in which there is no universal sovereign or worldwide government.
2. Define anarchical society and society of states. (2 marks)
Award up to 2 marks for:
recognising that the international system is anarchic
explaining that states can nevertheless be members of a society or achieve a degree of co-operation
3. Explain one way in which norms can contribute to co-operation between states. (4 marks)
A strong response should explain a chain such as:
norms establish shared expectations about behaviour
this can make the behaviour of other states more predictable
greater predictability can increase trust
increased trust can make co-operative behaviour more likely
Higher marks require development of the relationship rather than simply defining a norm.
4. Explain the relationship between rules, trust and reciprocal behaviour within an anarchical society. (6 marks)
Credit developed points including:
states can recognise rules despite the absence of overarching authority
rules create expectations about how states will behave
repeated acceptance of these expectations can increase trust
increased trust gives states greater confidence in co-operation
one state's co-operation may encourage another state to respond similarly
reciprocal behaviour can therefore reinforce a continuing degree of co-operation
5. Analyse how anarchical society and society of states theory explains the development of co-operation. (6 marks)
Credit analysis such as:
no higher authority forces either state to obey, demonstrating continuing international anarchy
the states nevertheless recognise an informal rule
State A's compliance makes its behaviour more predictable
State B responds reciprocally by also following the rule
this reciprocal behaviour increases trust between the states
the scenario therefore demonstrates how a society of states can develop a degree of co-operation despite the absence of overarching authority
6. Analyse the similarities and differences between realism and anarchical society and society of states theory. In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas. (12 marks)
A strong response should develop direct comparisons.
Similarity: international anarchy
realism identifies international anarchy as a central feature of global politics
anarchical society theory also accepts that there is no overarching authority
both therefore begin with a state system lacking universal government
Difference: consequences of anarchy
realism connects anarchy to insecurity and the security dilemma
the security dilemma can increase tension and conflict
realism therefore regards war as inevitable
anarchical society theory instead argues that states can develop informal understandings despite anarchy
Difference: co-operation
anarchical society theory argues that norms and rules can increase trust
trust can produce reciprocal behaviour and a degree of co-operation
this challenges the more pessimistic realist implications of international anarchy
For higher levels, organise the answer around points of comparison rather than writing separate descriptions.
7. Analyse the similarities and differences between liberalism and anarchical society and society of states theory. In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas. (12 marks)
Credit developed comparison including:
Similarity: possibility of co-operation
liberalism emphasises mutual benefits and co-operation
anarchical society theory also argues that a degree of co-operation is possible
both therefore differ from the strongest realist expectation of inevitable conflict
Difference: theoretical emphasis
liberalism emphasises morality, optimism about human nature, harmony and balance
it also emphasises complex interdependence, global governance and international organisations
anarchical society theory instead explicitly begins from continuing international anarchy
Different explanations of order
liberalism explains co-operation through interdependence and growing governance
anarchical society theory explains it through informal understandings, norms and rules
these increase trust and reciprocal behaviour even without an overarching authority
Higher-level answers should maintain comparison throughout.
8. Analyse how realism, liberalism and anarchical society and society of states theory provide different explanations of international order and co-operation. In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas. (12 marks)
A strong response may organise the comparison into three themes.
Anarchy
realism and anarchical society theory recognise the absence of overarching authority
realism emphasises the insecurity produced by this system
anarchical society theory argues that anarchy can coexist with a society of states
Co-operation
realism is more pessimistic because power competition, the security dilemma and inevitable conflict limit co-operation
anarchical society theory argues that norms and rules can build trust and reciprocal behaviour
liberalism is more optimistic, emphasising mutual benefits, harmony and complex interdependence
Order
realism gives central importance to states, sovereignty, power and security
anarchical society theory sees a degree of order emerging informally between states despite anarchy
liberalism emphasises global governance and the growth and impact of international organisations
For the strongest response, make the comparisons directly and consistently, explain the consequences of each difference, and include the required synoptic connection to Core Political Ideas.
Comments