Shadowing Practice: Anarchy - Learn English Speaking with Video

Kies een oefenmodus

Elke modus opent een volledig scherm oefenruimte.

93 zinnen

Als zinnen te kort of te lang zijn, klik op Bewerken om ze aan te passen.

Hi, I'm Alan Sens and I'm sitting outside the International House at the University of British Columbia.

Welcome to the Global Politics instructional video series.

In this series, we're looking at a number of key concepts in the study of international relations and global politics.

Today we're looking at anarchy.

Now anarchy is important because anarchy is one of the core concepts in the theory of political realism.

Realists argue that the way global politics are

and the way global politics happens is all because it's an international anarchy that is to say,

the international system is anarchic.

And realists argue that this fundamentally determines the character of global politics, historically, today, and in the future.

So let's see what they mean.

Anarchy.

Now, when we think of anarchy,

often what comes up first is the idea of anarchism and anarchists of course are relevant in some contexts,

but we're not really interested in them right now.

We're actually focused on global politics.

So I'm going to draw an international system and I'm going to populate it with some states.

And I'll draw some very powerful states and some less powerful states and some even less powerful states.

Now, realists argue that this system is anarchic.

That is to say, it is characterized by anarchy, and they make that claim for two reasons.

First, there is no central authority in this system.

And what that really means is there's no world government.

There's no world government to establish rules, establish laws, or provide protection for anyone in the system.

The second reason this system is anarchic is that there is no world police force.

And as a result, there's no force to actually enforce rules or laws in this system.

Now, realists argue there's a number of consequences to this.

The first consequence is that states are very insecure in an anarchic environment,

and as a result, they are very concerned, obsessed, in fact, with survival, and that is their first and ultimate priority.

Second, realists argue that in this anarchic system,

states can really only rely on themselves for their own security.

And realists call this a self -help system.

And there's really only two ways states can help themselves to secure themselves against any threats,

and that's to increase their own military power or to form alliances.

Third, realists argue that in an anarchic system is extremely difficult to trust anyone.

So trust is difficult.

And as a result it's very difficult to promote cooperation.

Everyone in the system is worried about their own self -interests.

There's a lot of conflict in the system because it's

so difficult to establish long -term patterns of cooperation with others in an anarchic environment.

So realists argue that this anarchic structure makes states act the way they do.

This system, this anarchic system, determines the behavior of states.

And one of the examples that realists use to illustrate this, and we'll talk about here because this is a very good example,

is something called the security dilemma.

And the whole idea here is when states look out into the international system, and I'll just label these three more powerful states in the system,

A, B, and C.

When states look out into the system, they feel insecure.

So let's take state A.

It looks into the system and feels it's insecure.

There's no central authority, there's no police force, it needs to depend on itself for its own security, trust is difficult, it wants to survive,

and so as a result...

it will build up its military power.

And I'll just draw a little symbol there to express that.

And what state A is really doing is looking out in the system and saying, you know, we don't have any aggressive intent,

we don't want to attack anybody, but we can't trust anyone either, and we need to ensure our own security,

so we're going to build up our military to defend ourselves.

Now, State B looks at that and asks the question, why did State A do that?

Why did they increase their military?

Certainly, they realize that we have no aggressive intent towards them.

So, perhaps they're building up their military in order to attack us.

We can't take that chance.

It's a self -help system.

So, we better build up our own military in response.

State A then looks to that effort by State B to build up its military and asks the question, now why did they do that?

Surely they knew we have no aggressive intent towards them.

We were building up our military to defend ourselves, but then they go up and build their military up.

Why did they do that?

Maybe they're planning to attack us.

It's a self -help system.

So we better build up our military a little bit more in order to defend ourselves against State B.

State B then looks at that and goes, ha, why did they do that?

We increased our military just to defend ourselves, and now they've gone and increased their military some more.

We better do the same.

and then state A responds,

state B responds, and before you know it you've got an arms race between state A and state B.

Now meanwhile state C is looking at this and going what's going on?

These two countries are vastly increasing their military power.

We better do the same in case they're planning to attack us.

And before you know it you've got an arms race that's extended throughout the system.

And an arms race is a particularly extreme form or virulent example of the security dilemma.

And of course the dilemma here is that in their efforts to ensure their own security,

these states have now created an environment which is much more insecure than it was before.

I mean they're certainly no more secure than they were before

and arguably they're even less secure because this system is now much more hostile, much more filled with suspicion and distrust,

and could even lead to war.

So realists make the argument through the security dilemma as one example of how anarchy affects global politics.

The nature of the system, the character of the system, actually affects the behavior of states,

and it does so in a way that realists argue has examples throughout history.

So that was the concept of anarchy.

Now not everyone believes that realists are right when they describe the world as anarchic.

Most other theories have very different takes on how you would describe the international system and its fundamental characteristics. But clearly

if we do want to try to understand global politics realists do have a lot to tell us

and anarchy is one of the main contributions they make to this discussion.

I hope you enjoy this video.

Join me next time.

App downloaden

Alles wat je nodig hebt om vloeiend te spreken

AI UitspraakScoor elke zin

IPA OefeningBeheers elk geluid

WoordenschatBouw je woordenschat op

WoordenspelLeren terwijl je speelt

Scan QR

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

FOR YOU

Aanbevolen Video

48 zinnen

Woordenschat en spreektips bij deze les

Deze woorden komen het vaakst terug: realists, military, anarchic, anarchy, argue. Deze video bevat 93 zinnen en 1144 woorden om na te spreken. Het gesproken deel duurt 8:29. De spreker praat in een gelijkmatig tempo van ongeveer 135 woorden per minuut, prettig om te shadowen. 87% van de woorden hoort bij de 3.000 meest gebruikte Engelse woorden; de rest kun je beter vooraf bekijken.

Belangrijke woorden in deze video

De 15 moeilijkste woorden uit de video, met uitspraak en betekenis:

Woord	Uitspraak	Betekenis
realist zelfstandig naamwoord	/ˈɹɪəlɪst/	realist
anarchy zelfstandig naamwoord	/ˈæn.ɚ.ki/	anarchie, regeringsloosheid
insecure bijvoeglijk naamwoord	/ɪnsəˈkjʊɹ/	onbeveiligd
dilemma zelfstandig naamwoord	/daɪˈlɛmə/	dilemma
consequence zelfstandig naamwoord	/ˈkɑn.sɪ.kwəns/	gevolg, consequentie
anarchism zelfstandig naamwoord	/ˈænəɹˌkɪzəm/	anarchisme
anarchist zelfstandig naamwoord	/ˈæn.ɑɹ.kɪst/	anarchist
characterize werkwoord	/ˈkɛɹəktəɹaɪz/	karakteriseren
distrust zelfstandig naamwoord	/dɪsˈtɹʌst/	wantrouwen
obsess werkwoord	/əbˈsɛs/	obsederen
populate werkwoord	/ˈpɒp.jʊˌleɪt/	bevolken
realism zelfstandig naamwoord	/ˈɹi.əlɪzəm/	realisme
illustrate werkwoord	/ˈɪl.əˌstɹeɪt/	illustreren
arguably bijwoord	/ˈɑɹɡjuəbli/	onderbouwbaar, verdedigbaar
enforce werkwoord	/ɪnˈfoɹs/	handhaven

Phrasal verbs die je zult horen

Woord	Betekenis
build up werkwoord	opstapelen

Zinnen om te herhalen

Korte, volledige zinnen uit de video die je in alledaagse gesprekken kunt gebruiken:

Today we're looking at anarchy.
We're actually focused on global politics.
We can't take that chance.
Maybe they're planning to attack us.

Uitspraak om op te letten

De spreker gebruikt 25 samentrekkingen en verkorte vormen, zoals they're, we're, I'm. Spreek ze kort uit, zoals je ze hoort.

Lange woorden — let op de klemtoon: anarchism /ˈænəɹˌkɪzəm/, characterize /ˈkɛɹəktəɹaɪz/, realism /ˈɹi.əlɪzəm/, characteristic /ˌkæɹ(ə)ktəˈɹɪstɪk/, historically /hɪˈstɔɹɪkli/

Klanken die Nederlandstaligen lastig vinden:

/æ/ — opener dan de Nederlandse “e”: anarchy /ˈæn.ɚ.ki/, anarchism /ˈænəɹˌkɪzəm/, anarchist /ˈæn.ɑɹ.kɪst/, vastly /ˈvæstli/, characteristic /ˌkæɹ(ə)ktəˈɹɪstɪk/

Zo oefen je met deze video

Luister de hele video één keer zonder te spreken en noteer de woorden die je niet kent.
Spreek zin voor zin na op normale snelheid en herhaal elke zin tot je ritme gelijk is aan dat van de spreker.
Neem jezelf op en vergelijk met het origineel; let daarbij op woorden als realist, anarchy, insecure.

Wat is de Shadowing-techniek?

Shadowing is een wetenschappelijk onderbouwde taalleermethode die oorspronkelijk is ontwikkeld voor professionele tolkentraining en gepopulariseerd door polyglot Dr. Alexander Arguelles. De methode is eenvoudig maar krachtig: je luistert naar native Engelse audio en herhaalt het onmiddellijk hardop — als een schaduw die de spreker volgt met slechts 1–2 seconden vertraging. In tegenstelling tot passief luisteren of grammaticadrills, dwingt shadowing je hersenen en mondspieren om echte spraakpatronen tegelijkertijd te verwerken en te reproduceren. Onderzoek toont aan dat het de uitspraaknauwkeurigheid, intonatie, ritme, verbonden spraak, luisterbegrip en spreekvaardigheid aanzienlijk verbetert — waardoor het een van de meest effectieve methoden is voor IELTS Speaking-voorbereiding en echte Engelse communicatie.

Shadowing-techniek: lees de volledige stap-voor-stap-gids →

Shadowing Practice: Anarchy - Learn English Speaking with Video

Kies een oefenmodus

App downloaden

On freedom - Alan Macfarlane

World Order By Henry Kissinger

Has quantum mechanics proved that reality does not exist?

Both Russia and America only pursue power, not principle, argues Moosa Haraj

The Powers of Horror Exploring Julia Kristeva’s Theory of Abjection

La rebeldía, según Albert Camus

Is War Over? — A Paradox Explained

The Liberalism to Fascism Pipeline (Neoliberalism Explained)

What is the role of emotion in political psychology?

AI Governance Explained: Ethical, Transparent & Accountable AI for the Future

My script presentation

Supernatural thinking: Your brain’s anti-anxiety mode | Clay Routledge