| |
| Join Our Newsletter |
 Please Select sub-criteria |  |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Redefining the Globalisation Debate |
04 |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
The anti-globalisation movement
The anti-globalisation movement on the other hand provide a different alternative and again within the socialist realms of political philosophy we find differences amongst its foremost thinkers. There are those who argue passionately against globalisation and there are those who recognise that globalisation can be a force for good if the basis of globalisation proceeds upon a different intellectual path. George Monbiot articulates the case for completely restructuring the world order. One which is based upon a clear philosophical view of the world, he says, “Indeed, all nationhood is to some extent artificial, the product of historical accident, the convenience of tyrants and the disengagement of colonists.” He goes on to describe a Darwinian view of identity that should be the philosophical basis of all societies in the world, “The new mutation will force us to abandon nationhood just as, in earlier epochs, we abandoned the barony and the clan…For the first time in history we will see ourselves as a species.”
While the capitalist vision seeks to preserve the nation state albeit in a new form, the anti-capitalist vision seeks to eliminate the existence of nation states altogether through the creation of international structures that will truly represent the will of the people. The anti-capitalist movement or what is also known as the global justice movement seek to realise this worldview through the creation of a world parliament. Therefore the global justice movement realise that new international structures are needed if humanity’s political will is to be truly expressed democratically. Current international structures do not resemble the true reality of globalisation and the possibilities it presents to end conflicts and all the myriad of problems that plague the world. The World Bank, IMF and the UN are institutions created for a different world i.e. an industrialised and bipolar world. Whereas today the world moves ever closer to global integration and into post-industrialisation which means that existing structures need to be dismantled to facilitate this historic transition. Indeed these structures were created by the superpowers of the 20th century to further their imperialist interests around the world and it is in the realm of international relations and economy where we will find the great debates between the left and right reach boiling point.
One fundamental problem is that the capitalists seek to preserve their power whether it is within their own countries or globally. The capitalists on the European continent while moving towards economic integration and political cooperation still maintain the independence of their own respective nations so as to maintain their power in each nation and so they are be able to challenge American power. American capitalists on the other hand seek to maintain their global empire and monopolise the material wealth in the world. This is evident in the differences between Europe and America over a whole host of issues ranging from how to fight the war on terror to global climate change. The Kyoto talks demonstrated the intellectual inconsistencies of those nations who champion globalisation. America rejected the Kyoto treaty despite the overwhelming consensus of the world community. And the war of words over steel tariffs further demonstrated the inconsistencies of a free trade global economy between Europe and America.
Globalisation is therefore being used by the major capitalist powers to further their own national interests. The Europeans seek to become America’s equal partner by creating a new international order based upon shared interests and responsibility. Dominique de Villepin said, “The path to a new world is one we can truly map out together… To gain the support of the peoples and adapt to a new world situation, we have a duty to share. Without barriers or borders our world is rich with promise for the future… No international order can be built upon the power of a single country. So what path must we take? To go the unilateral route is utopia. If we want to be effective, we must have legitimacy. So the multilateral route is the only realistic one. Europe has to be one of the pillars of this new world!” Tony Blair further illuminated this thinking when he said, “It means reforming the United Nations so its Security Council represents 21st century reality; and giving the UN the capability to act effectively as well as debate.” Therefore we find that the capitalists are not making judgements solely upon a philosophical idea about identity rather judgements are made according to economic and political interests. Indeed since the end of the Cold War they also realise that they cannot completely control the markets and the preservation of the nation state goes someway to prevent trans-national corporations from dictating politics.
Globalisation therefore illuminates the flaws of secular philosophy and the contradictions of maintaining political structures that don’t emanate from the ideals of global integration. This is evident not only in the logical inconsistencies of preserving the nation state but also in creating or reforming global organisations that will only perpetuate western power which is evident in the G8. Whilst these logical inconsistencies remain, justice can never be truly achieved and which is why we are already seeing the embryonic stages of a global justice movement that seeks to dismantle these power structures. Indeed the creation of a new political party entitled ‘Respect’ and the growing influence of environmental politics upon the intellectual landscape means that we are seeing another dimension to the struggle between the ruling factions of society and the people i.e. this struggle mirrors the struggle between the people and the church and monarchy – the struggle between the workers and the capitalists. However the struggle in the 21st century will proceed upon a global scale. There are different dimensions to this struggle. There is the struggle between the United States and the rest of the world. Martin Jacques review of ‘World on Fire’ by Amy Chua reflects on this aspect, “Finally she considers the position of the United States in the post cold-war and argues that its global position is akin to that of a market-dominated ethnic minority.” The other dimension as I have discussed is between the global justice movement and the capitalists. However there is another dimension which hasn’t been really explored which is the Islamic ideology.
| |
| |
| |
| |
« First < 2 3 4 5 6 >
Page 4 of 6 pages
| |
|
|
