Materials On Marxism: Lenin And The Universalism

She gets there in the evening while listening to music

Stefano Terzi

invitation to read
David Held - Anthony McGrew
The concept of globalization

Excerpt from Globalism and anti-globalization, publisher il Mulino, Bologna 2001, pp. 14-25

The concept of globalization - The myth of globalization - the response of global

The concept of globalization Globalization has an undeniable aspect of material to the extent that you can identify and quantify, for example, flows malls, movement of capital and people across the world. These are facilitated by different types of infrastructure, and proper materials (such as transport networks or banking system) and symbolic (such as the emergence of English as a lingua franca), which represent true pre-conditions may be realized ordered and relatively permanent forms of global interconnection. The concept of globalization is in fact not refer to occasional, random encounters, but durable and institutionalized networks of interconnections worldwide. Moreover it goes well beyond a span of relationships and social activities across regions and national borders. The idea of \u200b\u200bglobalization in fact suggests a growing scale and intensity of this flow of reports, so that states and companies, which are increasingly involved in systems and networks of interactions that cover the entire world. The result is that distant events and developments may have significant impact on local economy, as, conversely, events of local importance, they end up having global effects. In other words, globalization represents a significant extension of the territorial and social action organizations in the direction of an inter-regional and intercontinental scale. This does not mean necessarily that the overall plan to take the upper hand on the organizer of social life at the local level, national or regional level, but rather that these life forms will be included in a larger system of power networks and inter-regional relations. Therefore, what are the vital details of modern social life, namely the constraints of time and geographical space, do not impose more stringent barriers to many forms of interactions and social organizations. The existence of the Internet and the development of ongoing transactions on the global financial markets are demonstrating. The more distance decreases, the greater the speed instead of social interactions. As demonstrated by the financial crisis in East Asia in 1997, a crisis occurring in distant parts of the globe have an impact immediate world-wide, leading to a drastic reduction in response time for those who must make decisions. Globalization brings with it a kind of cognitive revolution, which is expressed both in raising public awareness of the effects of distant events on local events, both in the widespread perception of the timing and dell'accorciarsi shrink the geographic area.
The term "globalization", said simply, denotes, therefore, the wider scale, the growing scale, the impact faster and deeper inter-regional relations and patterns of social interaction. It refers to a real transformation in the scale of the organization of human society, which places the community in relation to each other apart and widens the scope of power relations embracing the most important regions and continents of the world. This must not be understood as if there would be the emergence of a harmonious world society or a universal process of global integration within which there is a growing convergence of cultures and civilizations. The awareness of increasing global interconnections, not only causes new tensions and conflicts, can arouse Alters reactionary policies and create deep feelings of xenophobia. Given that large swathes of the world's population, or are not directly affected by globalization, or remain largely excluded from its benefits, this phenomenon is perceived as deeply divisive and, therefore, is also strongly contested. The unequal distribution of benefits of globalization means that it is not a universal process and is far from being experienced evenly across the planet.

The myth of globalization

For skeptics it is this aspect that makes the concept of globalization very unsatisfactory. The question they ask is: what is "global" in globalization? If the term "global" can not be interpreted literally, denoting a universal phenomenon, then the concept of globalization lacks specificity. Problem seems to become even a more relativist and subjectivist conception of "global", which sees it simply as the apex of a hierarchy of spatial levels of society and its interactions, from local to national, regional and down to the fact overall. No obvious geographical landmarks, how can one distinguish the international or transnational than truly global and supranational regionalization processes from the processes of globalization? And precisely because of the fact that a lot of literature on globalization does not specify the spatial referents of what is called "global" concept ends up being so huge that it is impossible to quantify empirically, and therefore, argue the skeptics, basically useless as a tool to understand the contemporary world. their question on the concept of globalization, the skeptics generally attempt to bring this concept to a definitive test: is then constructed an abstract model of an economy, a culture and a global society, to see how current trends match this model. Implicit in many of these models is a comprehensive conception of the economy or society modeled on the national level, but on a larger scale. Other critics of the globalist thesis instead pose the question of how contemporary globalization differs from what many economic historians have described as the belle époque of globalization, namely the period between 1890 and 1914. In both positions there is a strong presumption that the statistical evidence alone may establish the "truth" about the globalization process. The conclusions of the skeptics are negative in this respect rather descriptive and explanatory value of the concept of globalization. They conclude that a better conceptualization of the trends of the contemporary world is offered by such terms as "internationalization" - ie a growth of links between national economies and societies fundamentally distinct - "regionalization" or "triadizzazione", ie thicken and intensify in certain geographical areas "regional" (such as the European, North American or the Asian-eastern) of economic and social cross-border. This view underlines the continuing positioned in the contemporary world of the primacy of territory, borders and national governments in the distribution and allocation of power, production and wealth. But a question arises: how to explain the contrast between the spread of the discourse on globalization and the reality of a world whose daily lives continue to be dominated by the circumstances national or local?

According to many skeptics, the concept of globalization, instead of offering an explanation of the forces that shape the contemporary world order, would have a quite different meaning. The discourse on globalization is seen mainly as an ideological construct, a useful myth to justify and legitimize the neoliberal global project, namely the creation of a free world market and the consolidation of Anglo-American capitalism into the main economic regions of the world. In this context, the concept of globalization acts as a "necessary myth" through which political leaders and govern its own citizens because they meet the requirements the global market. It is therefore not surprising that the debate on globalization has been so widespread and coincides exactly with the rise in Western capitals and in international institutions as the IMF, the neo-liberal project that is based on consensus became established in the United States around the concepts of deregulation, privatization, structural adjustment programs (SAP-Structural Adjustment Programme), of limited government.
In this position of the skeptics is often associated with a strong attachment to a Marxist or a realist ontology. The analysis of the Marxist tradition consider that capitalism, as a social order, have a pathological expansionist logic: to safeguard the profits, capital must constantly conquer new markets. To survive, capitalism must therefore continuously expand its national geographic scope of capitalist social relations. The history of the world order in modern times is, in this position, the history of the Western capitalist powers which divide the world into exclusive economic zones of influence. Today, it is argued, imperialism has taken a new shape: the traditional empires were replaced by a new mechanism of multilateral surveillance and control, such as the G7 (now G8) and the World Bank. On this basis, the contemporary period is described by many Marxists in terms of globalization, but as a new form of Western imperialism, dominated by the needs and requirements of financial capitalism expressed in the major capitalist states.
realist position also presents the existing world order as determined primarily by the actions of nation states more powerful economically and militarily (and their emissaries). Consequently, the process of internationalization of economic and social relations is affected by the policies and decisions of the great powers of today, since only they have the military and economic power to create and maintain the conditions necessary for an open international system and nature liberal. According to the current realistic liberal world order, which is the basis of the recent intensification international interdependence, would, without the exercise of American power, with the collapse. This leads to another critical point: that the liberal system would not be historically destined to last, since, in a system where states constantly struggling to assert its dominance, the hegemonic power of states is inevitably destined to be eroded. How many skeptics are ready to say, in the absence of a hegemonic force capable of overseeing and directing a liberal system would occur, as has just happened in the period between 1919 and 1939, a race toward self-sufficiency and, consequently, the collapse of the world system. According to this interpretation of international interdependence is therefore only a temporary and contingent.

top

The response of the globalist point of view of globalist rejects the assertion that the concept of globalization can be simply considered as a purely ideological construct, or as a synonym of Western imperialism. While not denying that the discourse on globalization could also serve the interests of powerful social forces of the Western world, the global position emphasizes that it reflects real structural changes in the scale of modern social organization. This is evident, as well that in many other developments in the growth of multinational corporations and global financial markets, the international spread of popular culture, and the emergence of global environmental degradation. Rather than consider only economic globalization as a phenomenon, the overall analysis equates other dimensions of social life. This differentiated and multidimensional concept of globalization reflects a Weberian interpretation and / or post-Marxist and post-structuralist social reality, which is seen as comprising a series of system or network of distinguished political relations: the economic, technological, the political, cultural, natural, and so on. . Reduce Globalization to a purely economic or technological is considered deeply misleading, for the fact that it ignores the implicit complexity of the forces that shape modern society and order the world. For this reason, the overall analysis builds on a conception of globalization as a set of interrelated processes that operate within all the key dimensions of social power by the military, than the strictly up to the political culture. But this should not be assumed a priori that, within each of these dimensions, the historical sequences or spatial processes of globalization, are the same or comparable. Not necessarily because that form of globalization related to the sphere of culture are necessarily replicated in economic terms. The globalists supporting a concept of globalization, which recognizes those differences, and then accepts the possibility that it will carry out different speeds, and spread in geographical areas and different spheres.
this concept is central to the emphasis given to specific spatial characterization of the processes of globalization. In trying to differentiate the networks and global systems than those operating on other geographical scales, such as local or national, the global analysis identifies the space of globalization primarily with those activities and relationships that crystallize at interregional or intercontinental. This, however, the globalist forces to try to develop more analytically precise distinctions between the concept of globalization and the regionalization and localization, these concepts that refer to the link from one part of relations between states are geographically contiguous, to other thickening phenomena of social relations within states. In this perspective, the relationship between globalization and the other scales of social organization, they are not conceived in hierarchical terms or as contradictory. In contrast, the interrelationships between these different scales are considered as fluid and dynamic.
When trying to specify more systematically the concept of globalization is accompanied by a strong emphasis on its historical manifestations and thunderstorms. Rather than attempting to determine the extent to which contemporary trends toward globalization corresponds to an abstract model of a global world, or simply compare the scale of magnitude of these trends in different eras, the global point of view how to use fingerprint analysis sociostorica . This involves placing the modern process of globalization in that historic process which Braudel called the longue durée perspective, ie, in a pattern of historical changes taking place over a period of time at least secular. As we have confirmed the existence, already in pre-modern era of world religions, globalization is not a phenomenon specific only to the modern era. To explain the contemporary globalization is necessary to place it within the context of the secular trend of historical development worldwide. This development is distinguished, however, like many globally recognized, by several distinct phases with each other - to the era of geographical discoveries of the belle époque, the period between the two world wars - during which the pace of globalization seemed to intensify or On the contrary, regress. To understand the contemporary globalization must go to seek what differentiates these important stages of the phenomenon, namely how these systems and models of global interconnections are organized and how they reproduce, what their geographical extension and what is their story, as finally change the power relations at the interregional level. The global analysis extends the concept of globalization to understand the various historical forms in which it occurred. This requires a comparative examination of how, over time, the various forms of globalization are realized, both within the various spheres of activity (in the political, economic, cultural, etc.) and relations between them. This particular tradition
sociostorica analysis leads to a conception of globalization that makes it a process in a sense indeterminate. Globalization is not in fact entered in a logical pre-ordained that one can assume a unique historical trajectory or final outcome, namely the emergence of a single world society or a single global civilization. The temptation to reach conclusions on deterministic and teleological, is strongly opposed by the globalists, who tend to emphasize that globalization is driven by the convergence of several forces and contains within itself dynamic tensions. As noted above, the globalists reject the assumption that globalization is a phenomenon that can only be explained with reference to the imperatives of capitalism and technology. Neither can be understood simply as a projection of Western modernity around the globe. It is rather seen as the product of multiple forces, including economic needs, political and technological, as well as economic factors, to give two examples of their very distant in time and space, the creation of the ancient Silk Road or the collapse of state socialism. It does not contain within itself a model of historical development objective. Indeed, since it pushes the company into different directions, can simultaneously generate conflict or cooperation, integration or fragmentation, exclusion but inclusion, convergence or divergence, order or disorder. Rejecting or deterministic historicist interpretations of globalization, the proponents of the thesis gbobalista invite you to open a concept of global change, rather than a single static view of a globalized world. At this interpretation
globalist and literature relating to it is nevertheless also a central concept of global change that involves a substantial reorganization of the principles under which we organize social life and stance in the world. The three main issues identified are: the transformation of the dominant socio-economic organization, territoriality, and distribution of power. Through a process of gradual erosion of constraints on space-time social interaction, gbobalizzazione creates the possibility of new ways to organize transnational interactions, such as the global production networks and global regulatory regimes that govern them. At the same time, however, some local communities are made vulnerable to changes or conditions that develop on a global level, as seen in 1998 when the intervention of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the banana war between the European Union and the United States has had a dramatic impact on producers of bananas from the Windward Islands, West Indies.
In its work of transformation is that the conditions of the contexts in which they carry out forms of interaction and organization social, the gbobalizzazione also involves a rearrangement of relations between the territory and socio-economic and political space. Very simply put, the more the economic, social and political transcend national and regional borders, the more this leads to a direct questioning of territorial principles according to which social life is organized and modern politics. These principles assume a direct correspondence between society, economy and politics in a country well-defined and closed. The gbobalizzazione instead breaks this correspondence since the social, economic and political can not be reconciled with national jurisdictional boundaries. This does not mean that the territory and space have become irrelevant, but rather that, under the pressure of modern gbobalizzazione process, they are reinvented and reconfigured, that is inserted in a global context and more often, several possible configurations of them are in competition with each other. This last point are connected to the third and last aspect that we find in the literature gbobalista, namely the transformation of power relations.
gbobalista the center position there is a keen interest for power, its instruments, its configuration, its distribution and its impact.
The concept of globalization is also used to express the increasingly wide scale that it is organized and exercised. According to this new scale of geographical coverage, power relations reorganize themselves and between different regions of the world inside of them. The key points of political power and those who are subject to it can now often be separated by oceans, to paraphrase Jameson, under the conditions of contemporary globalization, the real power no longer resides in the same rooms where it is immediately experienced and suffered. That power relations have entered deeply into the dynamics of globalization, it is widely confirmed by the continuous disquisitions on the implications of this for nation states.

www.lastoria.org