Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization - A Critical

  • View
    144

  • Download
    24

Embed Size (px)

Text of Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization - A Critical

Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization - A Critical Introduction (2000) BA in International Relations from Pomona College (USA); MA and DPhil in International Relations from the University of Sussex. Professor in the Department of Politics and International Studies at Warwick University, where he also serves as Acting Director of the Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation. Taught at the University of Sussex, Brighton and the Institute of Social Studies, The Hague. Main publications: Globalization: A Critical Introduction (Palgrave, 2000; 2nd Edition Forthcoming in 2005); International Relations of Social Change (Open University Press, 1993); Contesting Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2000), Civil Society and Global Finance (Routledge, 2002). Forthcoming: Civil Society and Global Democracy (Polity Press, 2005); and Encyclopedia of Globalization (co-edited with Roland Robertson, Routledge, 2006).

Basic ConclusionsLittle consensus exists on the subject in respect of definitions, evidence, explanations, implications, value judgment and prescriptions. (2)

Chapters 1-4: General Definition / Chronology / Causal Dynamics Globalization is a transformation of social geography marked by the growth of supraterritorial spaces. However, globalization does not entail the end of territorial geography. Territoriality and supraterritoriality coexist. (8) Although globalization has made earlier appearances, the trend has unfolded strongly since 1960s. However, it does not need to go on indefinitely and could possibly reverse. (8) Globalization is an uneven trend, occurring mainly among propertied professional classes in the North, in city areas, and among the young. (8) Globalization is driven chiefly by rationalist knowledge, capitalist production, various technological innovations, and certain regulatory measures. (8)

Competing Definitions: What exactly is globalization? Globalization = Internationalization (enhanced cross-border relations) (15) Redundant; State interaction = century old process Globalization = Liberalization (enhanced trade across the world) (15) Redundant; Free trade = century old process Globalization = Universalization (emergence of global culture) (16) Redundant; Spread of culture = millennia old process Globalization = Westernization (spread of Western control) (16) Redundant; Imperialism/modernization = age old process Globalization = Deterritorialization (spread of supraterritoriality; social space is no longer mapped in terms of territorial places, territorial distances and territorial borders - 16; increasing number of global activities - 55) Only the last notion gives globalization a new and distinctive meaning - and identifies an important contemporary historical development. (3)

Has globalization brought continuity or change? Change in Production? Yes: knowledge society; new means of communication/transportation/data processing (20) No: agriculture, manufacturing remain central; capitalism continues (21) Change in Governance? Yes: Loss of sovereignty on state level; possible elimination No: Sovereignty on state level remains strong Maybe: Expansion of politics into substate (municipal/provincial) and suprastate (regional/global) realms; new multilateralism (IOs, global firms, global civil society) (22) Change in Culture? Yes: cultural synchronization No: increased cultural diversity, possible clashes of civilization (23)

Globalization: Liberation or shackles? Liberation? Yes: globalization = emancipatory force; win-win (25) No: globalizatgion = global apartheid; undermines security, equity, democracy (25) Less human security? Yes: neo-liberal forces undermine economical, ecological security; spread of intolerance and fundamentalism; cultural imperialism destroys traditional identities; unsettling of any and all truth leads to relativism (28-29) No: End of History prepares ground for perpetual peace (29) Less equity (social justice)? Yes: neo-liberal forces deepen social hierarchies (intra- and interstate) (29) No: raising all boats (Friedman); promote notion of equality (30-31) Less democracy? Yes: Elites hold control; democratic governance on global level is impossible (32) No: technology helps democratization; people are empowered (Friedman) (31) [e-parliament; UN parliament initiative]

Three (economic) perspectives of globalization1. Neoliberal perspective: The world is best served by FREE MARKETS. Government intervention is NOT permitted. (34) 2. Reformist (Keynesian) perspective: Markets are good. However, they are not perfect. Government MUST intervene to CORRECT MARKET FAILURES. (New Deal; welfare state) (36) 3. Radical perspective: Markets are NOT good. Local not global. Small not big (Arundhati Roy).

Three historic phases of globalization (global consciousness)1. 1600s: Emergence of global imagination - world religions; scientific revolution; Enlightenment; humanism; capitalism (63-65) 2. 1850s - 1950s: Incipient globalization - telegraph, telephone, radio, television; cars; aircrafts; global products; early global banking; proliferation of IOs (65-74)

3. 1960s - today: Full-scale globalization - global markets; global production; global banking; global corporations; global challenges; global tourism; world wide web (74-86)

Four main causes of globalization1. Rationalism: (93ff)- secular global consciousness - anthropocentric view of world as home of human species - belief in scientific universal truths - pursuit of efficiency

2.

Capitalism: (95ff)- global markets, goods, production, banking

3. Technological Innovation: (99ff)- air, electronic, digital; ecological change caused by technology

4. Regulation: (101ff)- standardization - liberalization - property rights - international law

Part II: Implications of Globalization In sum, globalization has bee a powerful force of social change, but the changes to date have not been epochal. The contemporary globalizing world remains capitalist, bureaucratic, communitarian and rationalist . (110) Analysis of current social order by means of focusing on structure of production (Ch. 5) - capitalist structure of governance (Ch. 6) - bureaucratic structure of communities (Ch. 7) - communitarian structure of knowledge (Ch. 8) - rationalist

Agent-structure debate (91) Core question: What causes social change? Is it agent driven OR is it a result of social structures? Methodological individualism: The aims and decisions of individual actors shape the social structures. Methodological structuralism: The organizing principles of social relations (eg, patriarchy, nationalism, rationalism, capitalism etc.) shape the social structures. Structuration argument: Both agent choices and structural dispositions shape the social structures. The account of globalization developed in this book is a structuration argument. (92)

How has globalization affected the modes of production? From Ch. 4 (Causes of Globalization): Capitalism has spurred globalization in four principle ways. global markets (economy of scales) global accounting (tax advantages) global sourcing (highest productivity at lowest costs) global mobility (move where conditions are in your favor) => globalization has offered capitalists a way to counter the strategies of socialism and economic statism that rose in much of the South during the mid-twentieth century. (98)

How has globalization affected the modes of production? (contd)Findings of Ch. 5: Globalization has substantially strengthened the position of capitalism as the prevailing structure of production facilitated the extension of surplus accumulation to consumer, finance, information and communications sectors => Consumerism! Stock market frenzy! Trade in hard-, software, servicing and content (e.g., Lawtank) encouraged major shifts in the organization of capitalism, including - rise of offshore centers (China, India, etc.) - rise of transborder companies (Bertelsmann, Nestle, etc. - cartels!?) - rise of corporate mergers & acquisitions (hotels, banks, phone companies) - rise of economic oligopolies (Microsoft, media, cement, cars)

How has globalization affected the structure of governance?Findings of Ch. 6: Globalization has led to emergence of post-sovereign governance new non-statist forms of governance; however, States remains crucial to governance; governance remains deeply bureaucratic (132) end of sovereignty (135) decline of welfare state; less redistribution of wealth (140) less inter-state wars (McDonalds effect?); more intra-state wars (142)

spurred several shifts in the main attributes of States transborder cooperation & constituencies (e.g., environment) (138)

promoted moves toward multilayered governance regionalization - EU, NAFTA, APEC, etc. (anti-globalization?); transworld (multilateral) governance - WTO, IMF, etc. (148) proliferation of international legal instruments (150)

encouraged some privatization of governance=> NGO involvement in policy formulation & execution (accountability?) (152)

How has globalization affected the structure of community?Findings of Ch. 7: Globalization has loosened some links between nations and states no end of the national project, but diversification of nationhood (ethnonations, region-nations, transworld nations) (160) [complication]

helped develop nonterritorial communities (class, gender, race, religion etc.) feminist, pacifist, liberal (!), socialist, black, ecologist, gay&lesbian etc. [complication]

encouraged the rise in cosmopolitan bonds (vision of single global community) global village; think globally, act locally; global solidarity etc. [completion; see also ONeills cosmopolitan justice]

increased hybridity in many personal identitiesidentity surfing (181); lost souls? (161) significant