Liberal internationalism is a set of ideas that hold that international progress is possible, with

progress defined as increasing levels of harmonious cooperation between political

communities. The Socialist International, on the other hand, is a global organization of political
parties dedicated to the establishment of democratic socialism. It consists of democratic
socialist, social democratic, and labor political parties, etc. The main difference between liberal and
social internationalism is that liberalism advocates for private property and capitalism, and is
willing to support the use of violence to protect it. While socialism seeks to establish collective
property relations in the major sectors of the economy. It would be foolish to gave up our own
bullets when confronted with a ruling class willing to resort to violence.

Liberal internationalism's strength's is that it promotes economic growth; with less government
regulation to stifle business growth, businesses will be more productive. The following benefit is
that it ensures we have a great country free of injustices and slavery. This also leads to a more
stable economy with fewer recessionary risks and less wealth disparity. Infringing on human
rights is against liberal philosophies, and they fight to ensure that individuals' rights are
protected. Liberalism promotes international peace and harmony. International/global
harmony and cooperation are fostered by open trade markets. There would also be fair
competition, with minimal state regulations ensuring perfect competition, as well as no barriers
to entry and a reduction in monopoly. Of course, if we have the advantages, we also have the
disadvantages of liberal internationalism, such as unfair business practices; if businesses are left
alone without any regulations or restrictions, they may not automatically form themselves into
the best and fairest formation. Market inconsistency, the government cannot easily control
market growth, there are cases where the market is unstable and experiencing a recession, or
affected by human behaviors, making the competitive market system difficult to predict. Unfair
wages, as well as a lack of restrictions on minimum wage rates, may allow some businesses to
pay wages that are insufficient to cover the cost of living. This also stifles consumerism.

Socialism has its strengths and weaknesses. The advantage or strength that socialism holds is
that it establishes a society centered on economic equality. That means you have a better
understanding of what each service or item will cost in the end. One of the most serious
complaints that capitalists have about socialism is the redistribution of income. When the very
wealthy are taxed to help the very poor, the entire society benefits from an increase in total
utility or happiness. The socialist society's goal is to promote the common good where
capitalism encourages people to make a profit at any cost. Even if you have to exploit others or
harm the environment, these actions are legal because you are earning money. If you make a
lot of money, even as an entrepreneur, you can live comfortably knowing that the money you
pay in taxes will help others in your community. Under the supervision of socialism, the
economy can become more efficient. Less money is spent on outreach and marketing, which
allows more money to be directed toward composition, innovation, and wage growth. The
shortcomings or weaknesses of this internationalism is that it imposes a significantly higher tax
burden on individuals. When an economy has a high level of progressive taxation, there are
more disincentives to consider when working or starting a business. Socialist governments can
impose severe regulations on various industries, limiting the number of available employment
opportunities. For example, requiring workers to be available for a specific shift or to work for a
specific wage can limit the number of open positions a business can support. It reduces societal
opportunities for innovation. Production within a socialist-style government structure tends to
prioritize internal needs over new opportunities. Because there is little engagement with the
government to develop new concepts, the options for innovation are limited. That means that,
in the long run, socialist societies may left behind those that choose to incentivize innovation.