Introduction

Different countries in the world have varied approaches to handling of world politics including anarchy and hierarchy. It is important to highlight that hierarchy is the oldest and widely applied for of government in many countries across the world (Dingwerth & Pattberg, 2006). It represents a form of rule with those higher giving directions or instructions those in lower levels. Anarchy on the other hand represents a form of government where people do not respect those in authority and instead, community consensus is reached or people self-manage themselves in society. The essay explores the significance of seeing hierarchy rather than anarchy as a basic principle in world politics (Katzenstein, Keohane & Krasner, 1998). It is important to examine existing literature on the same and establish facts that can lead to a detailed and informed conclusion on the principles and significance of hierarchy over anarchy. It is vital to explore basic principles that encompass or characterize both anarchy and hierarchy as approaches to international politics. Both approaches have consequences that make them preferable in some countries and inconsequential in others (Altarelli, Feruglio & Masina, 2003). In essence, the research paper aims to answer the question, “What is the significance of seeing hierarchy rather than anarchy as the organizing principle of world politics?” Examining existing literature will prove strategic towards ascertaining important aspects on international policing and strategy.

It is important to examine both anarchy and hierarchy from an international perspective. The order of would politics is that most states are single actors in any negotiation with other bodies. The international relation theory of realism assumes that a nation should exist as a single actor in any international relation (Buzan & Little, 1996). The organization in the world is an illustration of what anarchy is as there lacks a central government that each state should respect. For instance, the constitution of the United States does not have to work in another country as each state forms its rules that guide operations in international relations. According to realists, anarchy illustrates the current of world politics where each state forms its guidelines that push their agenda on an international platform. It is important for the essay to explore existing literature on realism as a way of gaining a deeper insight into aspect that involves international relations. Equally, hierarchy is another structure that is evident in international politics. For instance, the formulation of trade unions and other aspects such as the internet have made it easy for nations to form hierarchy (Baker, Bulte & Weisdorf, 2010). The basic principle of Hierarchy is having levels and other dignitary powers that are assigned to specific individuals to perform particular functions. In essence, the paper explores aspects of anarchy and hierarchy from both a domestic and international perspective in a bid gain a deeper understanding on the same.

2.0 Background Information

2.1 Hierarchy and its Principles

Hierarchy represents a form of governance characterized by different authority level within a country or organization. Most countries in the world use the approach to handle various issues in their territories and it is important that the essay explores the scope of its principles (Wendt, 1992). It illustrates the rule of power of the higher over the lower within a specific country. For instance, the United Kingdom is an example of a country that applies hierarchy as a guiding principle to world politics. Hierarchy is characterized by several principles that act as a guiding framework in its administrative duties. Lower levels in the hierarchy system are subordinate to immediate above level as a way of maintaining organization and order (Hobson & Sharman, 2005). Organizations or countries that apply hierarchy enjoy order and conformity as every individual in community plays their role as required. The shape of the administrative structure used in hierarchy is similar to that of a pyramid. All levels represented in hierarchy must work and achieve its purpose as they depend on each other for smooth operations (Wachhaus, 2012). For instance, the vice president in a country is directly below the president and must comply with regulations and directions as issued from a higher office. It is vital to examine basic features of hierarchy in a bid to gain a deeper understanding on the discussion topic.

The first principle that can be associated with hierarchy is the fact that it is characterized by graded levels that perform various functions. As already noted, a person lower in the pyramid should take instructions from a higher authority and there is only one immediate level that is higher (Dingwerth & Pattberg, 2006). There are different levels of hierarchy that characterize the approach to world politics all governed by one superior. Authority in a government descends from top to bottom and not otherwise. Lower officers in the system cannot give orders or instructions to high ranking personnel in higher hierarchy levels. In hierarchy, duties are graded in a system and placed in different levels in a shape that resembles a pyramid. Each individual is expected to respect higher authority and manage lower authorities as required by principle. An example that can illustrate hierarchy is the federal court system in the United States (Wendt, 1992). Lower courts are meant to listen and follow advice as directed from higher courts in the system. The country has three levels of hierarchy within its federal court system. It includes trial courts, appellate courts and important the Supreme Court of the United States, which binds all other courts from lower hierarchies within the federal court system (Milner, 1991). Hierarchy is characterized by different levels that are graded based on duties within a government. The United States is an example of a nation that uses hierarchy in its federal court system.

The second principle that can be associated with hierarchy is that no intermediate level shall be skipped in dealing with people in a system that is significantly hierarchical. For instance, an individual seeking approval of a project from the president cannot go directly to do the same (Milner, 1991). There is a need to follow procedure and consult with immediate levels that will in turn pass the message as required. The United States federal court system is organized in a manner that one cannot appeal directly from the trial courts to the Supreme Court. Such conformity in the system guarantees organization and sustainability in running of operations (Tariq, Rizwan & Ahmad, 2018). Equally, managers higher in the hierarchy level should coordinate well with those in lower levels in a bid to ensure that instructions are well issued to avoid insubordination. The role of hierarchy in promoting conformity standards within a system should not be overlooked. When the government is giving an instruction on a particular matter, it is vital to do so t6hrough the government spokes man as a way of maintaining order and conformity (Wendt, 1992). Unlike anarchy, hierarchy recognizes the efforts that are in place regarding levels based on duties that each individual performs. Countries that use hierarchy enjoy privileges associated with regulated and standardized job performances.

2.2 Anarchy and its Principles

Anarchy represents a form of governance where people do not recognize existence of a government or a particular authority to act as a guide. In anarchy, people in society rely on community consensus and individual governance as approaches to handling various matters in society (Milner, 1991). The lack of a coercive power between states in the international platform makes it difficult for international law to formulate rules that can govern states. The United Nations is one of the bodies that many people assume can help control anarchy. However, the UN has failed in its mandate as member states have no common ground for formulating such policies. It is important to explore basic features of anarchy and determine how it pacts growth and development in many nations (Tariq, Rizwan & Ahmad, 2018). There are few countries that use anarchy as an approach to international politics. In most situations, anarchy arises in a state during civil war or conflicts that divide people based on societal predicaments. Anarchists in any country believe that a government has no place in society and people should manage themselves unconditionally. Examining existing literature on anarchy and its significance in international politics can help gain a deeper understanding on the same (Altarelli, Feruglio & Masina, 2003). Anarchy as an approach to international relations has more negative consequences than positive ones. Failure to have a government can lead to civil unrest where other groups might want to take control against the law.

The first principle of anarchy is that people have no authority that acts as a guide to conformity standards in a society. Anarchy is widely recognized as the synonym for chaos and breakdown of civil order in a specific society (Baker, Bulte & Weisdorf, 2010). Countries that experience anarchy might face challenges coordinating various sectors of the economy in a bid to promote growth and development. It represents a political philosophy used by opposition to the rule of government in a manner that challenges government performance. Most people who advance anarchism do not recognize efforts made in hierarchies to promote peace and diplomatic relationships on a global front. Anarchists in most circumstances reject the existence of a government and deny advances made by the authority to control individuals in society (Parent & Erikson, 2009). Such individuals believe in the self and oppose any attempts to be governed by an existing government in the name of advocating for freedom. An example of a group of anarchists that formed in the recent past includes the Russian Revolution. The revolution removed Russia from civil war and laid basis for formulation of the Russian Empire. The evolution in Russia began with the abolition of the monarch in 1917 and the same was completed in 1923. The state of anarchy in a system risks capital investment plans and other important aspects that impact politics within a country (MacDonald, 2018). In essence, anarchies do not recognize efforts put in place by governments in controlling the way of life within a community.

3.0 Anarchy on International Level

Anarchy illustrates a situation where each actor in international relations takes its own position and shares power equally among members. It is important to highlight that in international politics, there lacks a central government that should give directions to each particular actor (Lake, 2007). Each member state acts in interest of its wellbeing, which has made it difficult to develop a central government to handle various matters. Many people assume that anarchy leads to conflicts and deconstruction of proper international relations. However, anarchy has existed on the international platform for ages (MacDonald, 2018). There is no specific state in the world that is mandated to run or control affairs of another country. Realism best explains how states exercise anarchy on an international platform (Parent & Erikson, 2009). Having a central government means that each country in the world has to abide by set standards and legal frameworks. It is vital to explore the theory of international relation and establish how it increases the scope of understanding on how anarchy has traversed and existed in world politics for long.

The fist basic principle of the realist theory is that states act as single and independent actors towards international relations. It is important to note that other bodies exist, such as individuals, entities and other bodies, but their power and control over a state is limited (Lechner, 2017). Second, the state is a unitary actor and in times of war and threat to sovereignty, the state should act and speak in one voice. According to the theory, state negotiators are rational actors who should act in pursuit of interests that benefit the state in one way or the other. In essence, anarchy on an international platform perpetuates the values and principles of realism (Kang, 2004). It is vital to explore further aspects of realism and establish how it is linked to anarchy as a principle that is widely applied on an international platform. The theory assumes that state leaders act in interest of the country and they should have a special quality to push economic growth and development (Buzan & Little, 1996). Realism helps understand how anarchy is structured and the impact of its practices within a society. Maintaining a central government with a single guiding legal framework might be a challenge hence the reason why people exercise anarchy.

The idea of states being anarchical in the world in most cases results to conflicts that have become endless in actual essence. For instance, some countries have failed to agree on important aspects regarding territories and they end up fighting (Kang, 2004). Equally, some countries have imposed serious sanctions on immigrants from other countries as a way of restricting their operation. Such conflicts result in deaths and loss of economic value for one of the actors or both. The logic of taming anarchy can help have some extent of guidelines that act as principles in societies. The world political organization is an illustration of anarchy where each member enjoys equal rights to power. There is no single state that should feel powerful enough to formulate policies as guiding principles for another country. According to Hedley, two states that are in contact and have something that makes them behave as a whole is a clear indication of anarchism. States across the world have their own rights in the international politics that protects their sovereignty (Parent & Erikson, 2009). However, the emergence of the internet and trade unions is jeopardizing the position of states to stay anarchical. Anarchy has existed in international politics and has led to some conflicts before even though it has advantages that make it significant.

It is vital for the essay to explore how anarchy can be tamed at an international level to help bring the best results on the same. For instance, developing regulations that manage particular markets or industries across the world as agreed by players can help control the impact of anarchy (Lechner, 2017). Failure to tame anarchy might prove consequential towards promoting good relations in international politics. Formulation of organizations and teams that govern and oversee operations at an international level might prove strategic towards handling and taming the effects of anarchy in the real world (Wendt, 1987). For instance, trade agreements and labor laws can be formulated to control the way that business people and firms treat or pay their employees. Failure to put in place such restrictions might jeopardize the safety and wellbeing of employees across the world. In essence, regulations and laws that are established by different players within the international platforms can help tame the impact of anarchy (MacDonald, 2018). John Iikenberry is one realist who asserted that social contracts between institutions at an international platform can help handle the issue of conformity and promote good international relations. Anarchy can be tamed at an international level to help improve performance in a particular sector.

Sovereignty in world politics illustrates that a principal actor in the international politics is the final authority. The fact that ach state in the world has its principles that guide its operations in every activity is an indication that sovereignty is a sign of anarchy (Baker, Bulte & Weisdorf, 2010). Member countries have a right to formulate policies that govern and guide society in a manner that does not impact each other’s activities. There is a need to view anarchy as a way that countries have gained independence in a bid to serve the interests of their citizens. Emergence of technology has threatened the existence of sovereignty in society as people can communicate and interact from any part of the world (Wendt, 1987). The president of the United States can give an address from a different location in the world with the aid of advanced technology. Such developments have made it difficult for countries to maintain their anarchical state in international relations. Trade agreements that countries form have also reduced the impact of anarchy (Baker, Bulte & Weisdorf, 2010). In essence, anarchy on international platform has dominated as the sole approach in handling various matters. The emergence of the internet and digital technology has threatened the continuity and sustainability of anarchical principles.

4.0 Hierarchy in International Relations

Hierarchy illustrates a type of government that is characterized by order and conformity within institutions. The principle of span of control should not be overlooked as a basic feature that characterizes hierarchy (Dingwerth & Pattberg, 2006). The span of control illustrates the number of subordinates or units of work that an individual can direct control and supervise within the system (Cerny & Prichard, 2017). Higher officers in a country have more subordinates that they control and the same reduces with immediate levels of hierarchy. The principle illustrates the number and the range of direct, habitual communication contact with a higher authority and other lower level in the system. It is important to note that the span of control in a level or an individual significantly impacts delivery of services and approaches to pubic administration (Tariq, Rizwan & Ahmad, 2018). The span of control principle in hierarchy provides that each person in higher authority must have a maximum number of subordinates who are directly under control. The span of control is a significant principle of hierarchy that stipulates the number of subordinates that should be controlled in a particular level.

The principle of unity of command forms an important basic feature of hierarchy as an approach to international politics. The principle stipulates that each individual should have one superior where he/she should report issues that happen (Milner, 1991). An employee or officer in the government should receive orders from one superior. Hierarchy stands for monocommand as a way of avoiding insubordination within a system. For instance, officers in the same level within a government cannot direct or control each other. The unity of command principle guarantees a clear and precise approach towards handling of issues without failure in a system. Employees or officers that are control by several higher authorities might get confused and fail to deliver as desired. Countries that use hierarchy as an approach to international politics have done well to spearhead increased productivity and diplomatic stability (Cerny & Prichard, 2017). Hierarchy is the most widely applied approach to international politics and its principles have proved to be essential in promoting improved relations.

Hierarchy in international relations can be classified into three major categories that have made a huge impact in influencing operations. The first category involves the logic of trade that has brought together countries from many parts of the world (MacDonald, 2018). For instance, functional bargains that have been formulated have helped create a pool of goods and services for markets, especially for developed nations. Ensuring hierarchy in every aspect helps promote conformity and allows for improved relations among member states. An example of a situation that shows some hierarchy is the use o the US dollar as a global currency. It is important to note that each country in the world has its currency that should be utilized as a legal tender. However, the US dollar is widely acceptable as legal tender on international platforms as compared to other currencies (Kang, 2004). In essence, the application one currency in most global business is an illustration of how hierarchy has taken over in the world of business. The US currency is acceptable globally in many parts of the world as it is recognized as a strong player in business. Another example includes European Union that was formed by specific members who aimed to create a favorable market within the regions (MacDonald, 2018). However, the issue of Brexit has significantly impact operations in the market to a large extent. In essence, the development of trade union and establishment of internet infrastructure has changed the scope of operation and strategy towards international politics.

The logic of positionality is another important aspect that hierarchy has observed in many societies. For instance socializing and stigmatizing in some communities is a show of hierarchy that should be eliminated (Brown, 1992). Hierarchy based on race and ethnicity might be detrimental to peaceful and mutual co-existence of individuals in society. Hierarchy in international politics can make individuals who stay in a foreign country feel insecure as majority or natives would feel superior. Cases of racism have been reported in the past in developed countries due to the impact of hierarchy in such societies. The third logic of hierarchy that is evident in international politics is the logic of productivity. It is important to note that some countries have formed hierarchy ranks according to means of production and the level of their output (Havercroft and Prichard, 2017). Such aspect in international politics can help promote conformity and ensure that each member state has followed regulations that have been put in place by mutual agreement.

The development of the internet and advanced technology has been a pillar that has neutralized the effect of anarchy on international platforms (Havercroft and Prichard, 2017). For instance, people have become open to each other on social media platforms to the extent of reducing stigmatization that arise due to social interactions. People can make interactions from remote locations across the world and share their views on matters that affect life in society. Trade has become different as giant companies can make sales and ship products as per order requests (MacDonald, 2018). Such occurrences in business have changed the scope of international politics to the extent of supporting hierarchy. Trade and labor laws across the world have become centralized in a manner that each company or firm should comply with safety and health standards for each individual.

5.0 Conclusion

To sum it up, Hierarchies illustrate a system of governance characterized by graded levels based on duties. Anarchies do not recognize the presence of governments and prefer that political power is equally distributed to all in community. A comparison between the two forms of strategy to international politics indicates that hierarchy provides better options for people in community as compared to anarchies. The rule of the law must be respected and each level must take instructions from the intermediate officer. Anarchies prefer that resources are decentralized and shared in an equal manner in accordance with an agreement with the specific society. It is important to note that hierarchies help in advancing and administering accountability as a crucial virtue in promoting growth and development. Hierarchy provides the right path to leadership and governance within most developed nations. For instance, the federal court system of the United States is an illustration of a judicial institution that uses hierarchy to execute its mandate in society. In essence, hierarchies guarantee better results than anarchies, especially in relation to economic growth and development.

The rule of law in a country is an important aspect as it acts as a guide to various procedures and conformity issues. Some countries have different forms of governments including democracies that are based on hierarchy. The need to respect a higher authority creates a sense of direction and promotes conformi9ty in a significant manner. International law should consider such aspects as some nations suffer due to the leadership approach that they have taken. There is a need to explore existing literature on the principles of the two approaches and gather enough evidence or data for an informed conclusion.

References

Altarelli, G., Feruglio, F., & Masina, I. (2003). Models of neutrino masses: Anarchy versus hierarchy. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2003(01), 035.

Axelrod, R., & Keohane, R. O. (2018). Achieving cooperation under anarchy: Strategies and institutions. In Cooperation under anarchy (pp. 226-260). Princeton University Press.

Baker, M., Bulte, E., & Weisdorf, J. (2010). The origins of governments: from anarchy to hierarchy. Journal of Institutional Economics, 6(2), 215.

Brown, C., 1992. International relations theory: New normative approaches (Vol. 327). Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Brown, W. (2006). Africa and international relations: a comment on IR theory, anarchy and statehood. Review of international studies, 119-143.

Buzan, B., & Little, R. (1996). Reconceptualizing anarchy: Structural realism meets world history. European Journal of International Relations, 2(4), 403-438.

Cerny, P. G., & Prichard, A. (2017). The new anarchy: Globalisation and fragmentation in world politics. Journal of international political theory, 13(3), 378-394.

Dingwerth, K., & Pattberg, P. (2006). Global governance as a perspective on world politics. Global governance: a review of multilateralism and international organizations, 12(2), 185-204.

Havercroft, J. and Prichard, A., 2017. Anarchy and International Relations theory: A reconsideration. Journal of International Political Theory, 13(3), pp.252-265.

Hobson, J. M., & Sharman, J. C. (2005). The enduring place of hierarchy in world politics: Tracing the social logics of hierarchy and political change. European Journal of International Relations, 11(1), 63-98.

Kang, D.C., 2004. The theoretical roots of hierarchy in international relations. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 58(3), pp.337-352.

Katzenstein, P. J., Keohane, R. O., & Krasner, S. D. (1998). International organization and the study of world politics. International organization, 645-685.

Lake, D. A. (2004, September). Hierarchy in international relations: Authority, sovereignty, and the new structure of world politics. In annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago (Vol. 2, No. 5).

Lake, D. A. (2007). Escape from the state of nature: Authority and hierarchy in world politics. International Security, 32(1), 47-79.

Lechner, S. (2017). Why anarchy still matters for International Relations: On theories and things. Journal of International Political Theory, 13(3), 341-359.

Lechner, S., 2017. Anarchy in International Relations. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies.

MacDonald, P. K. (2018). Embedded authority: a relational network approach to hierarchy in world politics. Review of International Studies, 44(1), 128.

Milner, H. (1991). The assumption of anarchy in international relations theory: a critique. Review of International Studies, 17(1), 67-85.

Parent, J. M., & Erikson, E. (2009). Anarchy, hierarchy and order. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 22(1), 129-145.

Tariq, M., Rizwan, M., & Ahmad, M. (2018). Human Nature, Anarchy and Hierarchy as Determining Factors of Realism. Global Socail Sciences Review (GSSR), III, 477-487.

Wachhaus, T. A. (2012). Anarchy as a model for network governance. Public Administration Review, 72(1), 33-42.

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International organization, 46(2), 391-425.

Wendt, A.E., 1987. The agent-structure problem in international relations theory. International organization, pp.335-370.