What does it mean for a nation to win? Life isn’t a board game, but it can be indicative of the challenges that the international community faces when several nations try to “win”. International recognition is important to most nations, as the way a country is portrayed in the global arena and the standing a nation has with others can be telling of how much a country has won. Economically, having a stable and functioning system that allows for competition and free markets can be beneficial and opening trade can create a surplus that can mandate “winning”. I think the basis of any nation being able to claim that they have “won” revolves around the concept of having a solid foundation and balance throughout all aspects of the social, political, and economic areas. There is no substantive way to measure if a nation has won, but numbers and figures like GDPs and growth rates create a numerical calculation to determine the degree to which an economy is thriving.
I find it hard to say anything definitively in terms of a nation winning because whether or not a nation wants to be received well in the international community is entirely their prerogative. The most ironic thing is if a nation feels as though it is “winning”, sometimes that is the highest peak of a nation’s “winning streak”.
What else, except ignorant bliss, does a nation need to believe in except itself? The nation I’m thinking of here is North Korea..who I’m sure understands the weaknesses it has and surely the little international recognition it receives. However, the way they function is truly indicative of a nation that believes that they are doing the best thing possible for itself, and accepts little to no criticism. Surely they don’t consider themselves a losing nation, but does the fact that few nations agree with that premise matter to them? Or is it just a matter of how confident a nation is within itself to pursue international goals? Influence surely plays a part in the role of a nation “winning”, because there is no way a nation can be forceful internationally without having some sway over the decisions of others, and the capability to back itself up if it decides to go against what other nations feel. So my definition of winning has clauses sucha s this: a nation has “won” so long as it believes in full faith that it can have some form of persuasion and respectable opinion in the eyes of the global arena.
Rebecca, I'm glad that you offered North Korea as an example of a "blissfully ignorant" winning state. Do you think that winning cannot be based solely upon the perspective of that individual nation? In other words, for a country to win, do other nations need to voice their recognition of that country's success?
ReplyDeleteI think that winning matters to a sovereign nation- and the way they choose to portray themselves impacts their definition of winning. That is, if public image matters to them- they will care if other nations view them as "winners" or not.
ReplyDelete