Founding Philosophy of International Liberalism

Founding Philosophy of International Liberalism
To effectively understand international liberalism and identify the main tenets of liberalism and how they apply to the distribution and regulation of both military or civilian nuclear technology and resources within the twenty first century requires referencing back to both Greek political philosophy and eighteenth century British and French scholarly writings. Socrates’ study of human things as opposed to the study of natural things or the divine, paved the way to a philosophical understanding for both the nature of justice and the nature of the human soul. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle identified in their writings with the polis, the Greek city-state, as a way of rationalising the nature of the human society to provide clarity to their understanding of the nature of man .(Refer footnote १)

Aristotle associated as part of his six essential activities for a community that military service along with the administration of property was necessary to ensure the self-sufficiency of the State. (Refer footnote २) Military service and public administration today are necessary for the management of nuclear strategic assets . (Refer footnote ३) The level of impact that they can inflict within and out side a State does not allow them to be considered only as a military or State asset. Within the context of the contemporary international system, these assets need to be considered as international assets and administered accordingly. The impact that these assets have on man and nature warrants due regard to be attributed to the control, command and management of such assets.

The following reference identifies that ignorance, not a desired characteristic of a liberal society was the cause for discrimination and inequality. It is seen to prevent advancement in equality, freedom and the application of the rule of law for the individual. The perception of ignorance does not necessarily take into consideration the requirements associated with different societies that have different cultural backgrounds and the required actions taken by those societies to ensure that advances in freedoms, equality and the rule of law for the community are assured.
The reason why the classical political philosophers were chiefly concerned with the city was not that they were ignorant of other forms of society in general and of political societies in particular. They knew the tribe (the nation) as well as structures as the Persian Empire. They preferred the city to those other forms of political society. The grounds of this preference may be said to have been these: tribes are not capable of a high civilisation, and very large societies. (Refer footnote ४)
Empires are more reflective of the person in power and the resultant civilisations reflect only their ideals for organization and are not reflective of liberalism, as freedoms and equality for the individual are not assured। (Refer footnote ५) Ignorance today is a human trait that is either a choice by the individual or a choice made for the individual through editing of information as a means of ensuring that freedoms and equality are upheld for the wider community.

Footnotes
1 It is the indiscriminate nature of man that identifies that within an international liberal context for the assurance of nuclear security, the current international institutions governing nuclear technology and resources need reform and empowerment which will be discussed.
2 John Ferguson, Utopias of the Classical World, London, 1975. P.85. Ferguson elaborated that Aristotle’s approach to the state is idealistic as he identified that the states’ existence is for best possible life yet he offers undertones of a pragmatic interpretation of the freedom of man. His identification that to obtain an ideal constitution is unachievable as all men would not be able to live equally. There would be a hierarchical construct, those that rule and those that are ruled.
3 Nuclear Strategic Assets refers to nuclear power reactors, nuclear research reactors, nuclear weapons and associated facilities for associated supply of fuel and storage of waste.
4 Leo Strauss & Joseph Cropsey, History of Political Philosophy, Chicago, 1987, p.6
5 Iran, although moved on significantly from the days of the Persian Empire, may not be considered as a liberal democratic society as the country’s spiritual leader is able to exercise overall authority even though the President and Principle Ministers are elected. Although liberalism may not be reflected within Iran, their approach to advancing their civilian nuclear technology, notably the continued desire to enrich uranium, without appropriate international support, highlights the inadequacies of the current international institutions governing strategic nuclear assets.