NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... on but for the wrong reason, particularly every reviewer focused on this chapter "When the Russia Empire is Gone' (Drucker 1989, p 1). Many reviewers thought that the title sheer nonsense since the Soviet Empire was already falling apart; but Drucker, never attempted to prognosticate or forecast anything, but he attempted to describe the realities of our present world. By describing how the Russian Empire was falling apart, he gave us the time to develop a plan to face the effects of this impact in world.
Drucker said that Gorbachev's perestroika was just an attempt to forge a new bond of unity through economic growth and development; but Drucker clearly stated that this approach was certainly to fail. He said that within twenty-five years or less, the Russian Empire was to disappear or at least would have change from European into post European and primary Asian. He stated that the only question is how fast the process will be and whether it will lead to a dismemberment of the empire or to its restructuring. He said the process would occur whether the reform movement begun in 1982 by Mr.
Gorbachev succeeds or not (Drucker 1989, 27). Drucker saw three possible outcomes coming out of this. "He said that one was the probability of the Russian Empire splitting into European parts and Asian parts; the second and third probability Drucker suggested was the idea of an Asian domination and the possibility of some sort of confederation, loosely held together and in constant turmoil", as nationalities in and through their autonomous republics struggle with each other for power, each trying to dominate the others (Drucker 1989, p 32). He points out the need of the Western countries to be ready for this change in the Russian relationship with Western Europe. He said that this surely would require a major change in the political, economical, and social foreign policy toward Russia.
For the U. S, the disintegration of the Russian Empire, Drucker meant, a "total change of foreign policy and the assumption that have under girded American foreign policy since Woodrow Wilson abandoned not interventionism in 1917 " (Drucker 1989, p 34). Drucker saw America being the sole superpower of the world. After the fall of the Russian Empire, Drucker saw the need of stopping the arms race.
He said that the cold war era was one of the longest, biggest, and most widely spread arms race era in our history. "Armaments have been the growth industry since World War Two -not computers, not telecommunications, not biotechnology, not even finance" (Drucker 1989, p 40). He said that "third world countries such as Peru, Libya, and at that time Iraq has more, and more destructive, firepower than most of the great powers had when the Second World War began" (1976). Drucker thinks that the arm race has been counterproductive because it is a drain to the economic performance and economic development. He says that a major cause for the Russian economic crises was the huge expenditure of the soviet government in the arm race with the United States. He said that what is still required is" to rethink the role and functions of defense, of armaments, and of the military in the modern world, and a repositioning of the military in the body politics" (Drucker 1989, p 42). Drucker is not criticizing the advances of military technology to mankind, he said military technology have greatly speed up technical developments that otherwise would have taking many decades to reach commercial application, but he question and holds his reservation in the rapid spread of many types of weapons in the world.
In the 'Limits of Government' chapter, Drucker discusses that in the past the "government was what is should do but now the questions Drucker said, is can do" (Drucker 1989, p 55). He says that in this period of time, the limits and functions of government are the hottest issues. He feels that the 'government is no longer, as political and social theory postulate, the only power centre' (1989). "We now understand why there area some things government, by its very essence, cannot do, and even for the things that can do, the conditions must be right" (Drucker 1989, p 59). Drucker says that a government activity can work only if it is a monopoly; 'it can not function if there are other ways to do the job" (1989). He points out that a government can do well only if there are no political pressures. For example, the postal services and the railways did well as long as they had a simple purpose.
It cannot function if there are other ways to do the job, that is, if there is competition. Drucker says that "as soon, and perhaps inevitably, the pressure build to misuse such services to create employment, and especially employment for people who otherwise would find it hard to get jobs such as blacks in the U. S postal service, the system degenerates" (1989). Drucker says that The Post Office in the nineteenth century was a true monopoly. And so were the railroads. "There were no other ways of sending information or of moving freight and people over land; but as soon as there were alternative ways to provide the same service, government floundered" (1989).
Drucker also mentions that activities which government cannot do well and perhaps cannot do at all, even though they seem to meet all conditions for government effectiveness, government will not perform if an activity is under pressure to satisfy different constituents with different values and different demands. Performance, Drucker says, require concentration in one goal. Drucker find out that this distinction explain why "governments-owned businesses will only work if run as money makers pure and simple, as were the crown monopolies of the Continental of Europe" (Drucker 1989, p 63). In this next chapter, Drucker says that both society and policy in developed non-communist countries have become pluralism- each in a new and unprecedented way and each also in a different way. In the developed countries both society and politics has become pluralist again. Drucker's says that these new pluralism's are very different from anything known earlier and that this pluralism of society is one of apolitical, performance co-focused, single-task institutions.
Drucker says that the pluralism of the body politics are small and highly organized minorities groups that have single-cause or single-interest in their focus. Drucker says that "both the new pluralism of society and the new pluralism of the polity pose major challenges to political processes and political leadership" (Drucker 1898, p 71). He says that the single purpose institutions which none of them is a 'government' or a 'political' "each has to great deal of autonomy to produce results" (Drucker 1989, p 72). Drucker says that the mass movement of modern politics is a small minority no more than five percent to ten percent of the electorate but they dominate because it is well organize, active, directed, and committed to a single cause" (1989). In chapter 8, Drucker tell us to be aware of charisma of our leaders. He mentions that no century has seen more charisma than our twentieth century and that "never have polit...
Free research essays on topics related to: arms race, foreign policy, drucker, 1989 p, russian empire
Research essay sample on Russian Empire Arms Race
