Global Citizenship in Terms of Contemporary Discourses on Identity - Essay Example

? GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP Submitted By Introduction 3 The Idea of Global Citizenship 3 Globalization and Citizenship 4 Proliferationof Identity 5 Shifting Loyalty 5 New Citizenship Laws 6 Identity, Violence and Globalization 6 Globalization and social degradation 7 Minority Rights and globalization 8 Role of Religion 9 Multiculturalism without Culture 10 Globalization and Economic Volatility 11 Conclusion 13 References 15 Introduction The concept of globalization has entered almost in all areas of our lives be it business, language, education, culture, lifestyle and other psychological and social behavior patterns. It is argued that we are fast losing our unique identity and sense of belonging. Is global perspective sensitive to cultural diversity and social inequalities? Does the time for global citizenship has arrived which is above all differences? This paper aims at critically analyzing the concept of global citizenship along with the contemporary discourses of belonging and identity. It also aims at studying the underlying assumptions and ideology behind the two concepts supported by evidences. The Idea of Global Citizenship In recent times the idea of global citizenship in its various forms is fast gaining momentum all around the globe. It is inspiring youngsters to grow into global citizens; it requires them to be morally responsible, intellectually competent and culturally perceptive to diverse cultures. The trend for global citizenship started with social movements like eradication of poverty, labor rights, environmental protection etc. These organizations claim that they work for the welfare of humanity by ensuring social justice and democratic accountability in the world economy. These organizations claim the global citizenship and hence welfare for the humanity (Giddens, 2010). Global corporations also are working for the propagation of concept of global citizenship by projecting socially responsible public image through their corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. The concept of global citizenship has also seeped into the kind of human capital. The graduates of prestigious universities not only study but also work in global organizations different from their country of origin and have contacts literally all over the world. Such human capital also claims to be global citizens. Global citizenship is not a new phenomenon but it dates back to ancient Greece history. It is reflected in the fact that the word “Cosmopolitan” is a composite of Greek words for “order”, “universe” and “citizen”. In fact the idea of global citizenship is older than the concept of nationalism. This concept of global citizenship can be attributed to the growing public awareness about the global interdependence. However opponents of this theory which constitutes the intellectuals and political agents discard it as an impractical theory. They claim the concept of global citizenship is not possible in the absence of international or global governing bodies and global governments. The proponents of national government find global citizenship especially weak in the realm of politics, political science and legal issues where nationalism plays a vital role (Schattle, 2008). On the wake of global platform for digital communication and the interdependency of world the concept of global citizenship may flourish in other ways in educational institutions, global corporations and social organizations for humanity etc. Globalization and Citizenship Globalization and migration is seen as major threat or challenge to identity, belonging, humanitarian laws and human rights. As the world is becoming more global and open, the need for the protection of citizenship is growing. The major threats to citizenship are political threats, immigration or international migration and mobility, the growing trend of intolerance and religious fundamentalism and the endangered environmental and social security. There is a trend of restructuring of welfare system to match the changes in demographics. The sustainability of citizenship depends on its ability to respond to such changes. Proliferation of Identity Ever increasing globalization has put restrictions on the reliance of governments on national identity of citizens. What we observe today is proliferation of identities and multi belonging citizens. It is leading to the internationalization of values and the beginning of global culture. This trend is further enhanced by globally produced goods and fuelled by the culture of individualism, consumerism and hedonism. This trend of economic globalization is not going unchecked and some of the counter is disloyal identities and differing viewpoints of the world. Global culture is akin to ecological paradigm. The interaction with people of foreign culture is growing rapidly due to global and multinational organization as well as large scale immigration. Such cultural and workforce diversity leads to the absorption of foreign culture with every interaction. This results in national identity being replaced with multinational or global identity. Shifting Loyalty Loyalty is closely related to identity. Loyalty has emotional, intellectual and psychological aspects attached to it which defines the bond and allegiance to the value system. The commitment and dedication in loyalty determines the level of patriotism and nationalism etc. globalization has also affected loyalty and it has now moved from blind obedience to critical commitment (Miller, 2005). Loyalty is not restricted to a nation or state any more, the allegiance is now for the values be it at family level or the humanity as a whole depending on the level of moral obligation. The loyalty to institutions now depends on the level of protection these institutions provide to values. Moral obligation and sense of responsibility that comes with loyalty provides the ground of self sacrifice for higher cause. This explains the growing sense of global justice shown through various international organizations for global problems like poverty, war, human rights violations and social injustices etc. New Citizenship Laws Many international or global organizations such as United Nations Organization (UNO), World Trade Organization (WTO), World Bank, European Union (EU) etc provides the ground for international laws and legal issues that transcends national boundaries. This also provides multi layered or extra-national forms of citizenship which is akin to global citizenship. EU citizenship in the wake of European integration provides a good example of global citizenship. The new federal structure of EU with its regional arrangements and other principles has somewhat replaced the nation or state system. European Courts of Justice gives procedural and legal rights to individuals which can be enforced before national courts (Bosselmann, 2008). Identity, Violence and Globalization According to Amartya Sen, one of the few renowned intellectuals, our societies today are reeking with murderous violence, great confusion and inescapable hatred. This brutality and war all around the globe is because there is division of people on grounds of race, religion, class, and many other nationalist and ethnic grounds. He provides a vision of the world which can move towards peace and harmony with the concept of global citizenship (Sen, 2006). He believes it is the ideology of hate that has divided us into little boxes of ethnic groups and communities. It has one single dimension of defining our individual identities which is made up of multiple factors like class, sex, politics and personal interests etc. He believes that this “reductionist” approach of “ us versus them” is not confined to the much accused religious fundamentalist but this intellectual tendency is widespread. He argues that this extremism can be countered through freedom to choose one’s identity affiliations. He believes that narrow minded pluralism that defines our social psychology translates to group identity which often leads to violence. He believes that such violence can only be countered through humane pluralism. This concept is akin to global citizenship. He propagates monolithic identities and multiculturalism. Globalization and social degradation Dennis Smith argues that globalization has resulted in social degradation. Hence dynamics of humiliation should be taken into account in our analysis of social behavior. Humiliation and degradation to anger and action shapes the social behavior of those who have suffered it. Such humiliation, degradation, fear, revenge and victimization are actually a result of defeat, relegation and exclusion which is a product of globalization. Globalization through its highly competitive market conditions and the growing pervasiveness of exploitative cosmopolitan conditions has degraded the existent social system and brought humiliation. He believes that dynamics of humiliation should be combined with social degradation by the sociologist. Imperial impulse of globalization is also responsible for this degradation. He believes that various communitarian politicians, religious groups and socialists do not give enough importance to values. Political, religious and ethnic conflicts are marked by differences in symbolism reflected in actions rather than values. Core components of culture are of more significance in defining the symbolism and a source of problem as well. He believes that many people have been killed due to outburst of anger on religious and other ethnic factors. Anger, fear, resentment and revenge all these negative feelings fuel each other and lead to violence. In his paper he has also discussed the deadly virtues observed in Japan in terms of working hour and volume of work and the concept of perceived humiliation when compared with globalized economy. Globalization affects those perceived values and symbolism (Smith, 2008). Minority Rights and globalization How people should be identified is a primary question that needs to be answered. People can be identified on the basis of social criteria such as race, religion, language and ethnicity or on the basis of political communities. The existence of social diversity within the state becomes controversial and put question marks on the existence of political community. This social diversity dilemma raises many questions. Does ensuring equal rights and citizenship is enough or the only requirement for their individual identity and political freedom? Should we be concerned about the rights of minorities at all? Minority concerns are the most debated topics in political life because they are a source of inherent tension or controversy in human affairs. Minorities face competing desire of freedom and belonging. Human beings are termed as social animals hence the desire for social belonging is inherent in human characteristics. The desire for social belonging and freedom become competing values in minorities because social belonging sometimes demand subordination of one’ interest or freedom for the collective interest. Freedom encourages innovation and creates diversity whereas belonging creates conformity. Such diversity becomes the source of conflict. The contemporary problem of minorities is their lack of entitlement in political affairs and hence their self determination is compromised. These minorities in the form of citizenship, refugees, migrant workers and resident aliens are a result of globalization and leads to the concept of global citizenship. Role of Religion Religious beliefs although reflect the internal state of mind but its exercise is a social practice. The religious belief is sustained through shared beliefs, rituals and sentiments. Religious activities are usually performed collectively for the community benefit. Religion is the oldest known source of collective identity and sense of belonging. It is this feature of religion which makes religious diversity a dilemma and a source of potential conflict. Religion is one of the most vital constituent of identity formation and conception of life. Religion only becomes a source of conflict in situations where its practice is in conflict with the authority of political powers and their values (Preece, 2005). The recent example of this conflict based on the practice of religion is observed in France. Muslims females, the minority in France, were deprived of their right to practice their religion and use veil to cover their faces. The political government using its authority declared using veils as illegal. Hence practice of minority religion became a source of conflict in France. Religion has political significance because it can exert influence on the lives, values, conduct and human identity of the believers of religion. Religious diversity can at best be tolerated otherwise it can be a source of discrimination against minorities. What is required for the resolution of conflicts is not just religious tolerance, which is negative policy of restraint, but religious policy of acceptance, which is a positive approach of support. Multiculturalism without Culture It is argued that multiculturalism or cultural diversity deprives citizenship with its main constituents by affecting social cohesion and hence dissipating national identity. An example of early version of this phenomenon was observed in USA and resulted in broadly disruptive politics. According to Miller multiculturalism emphasizes on the differences within the group rather than the commonalities which diminish group solidarity and hence citizens resort to redistributive policies of the welfare state. Such social disunity results in many problems such as fear, victimization and perceived humiliation results of which have already been discussed above. Multicultural policies may result in unfair policies and biases among varying minority groups. Multiculturalism if misguided can lead to more separatism and hence makes it more difficult for the people of minority group to perceive themselves as belonging to the same national community. Such separatist mentally is often reflected in terrorist attacks. The notion and perception about culture also needs to be changed and it should go beyond a homogenized or standardized old concept. It should recognize the diversity of culture and should not unduly try to impose the culture of the dominant group. Multiculturalism is more tolerant and supportive; it includes diverse cultures on their face value and reject any assimilation of the dominant culture. The critics of this theory claims that multiculturalism does not act as cultural liberator but it only restricts cross cultural borders and diminishes the chance of borrowing influence from other cultures by authenticating the minority culture. After analyzing the two theories Miller concluded that cultures are highly permeable. It is impossible not to draw influence from other cultures. He goes to the extent that it is impossible to identify people from their cultural tags. He claims that certain traditions and practices of the minority groups cannot exempt them from being a member of a particular culture. According to him the old people are usually the carriers of minority culture. He believes it is quite possible to have multiculturalism without culture. He believes that due to many problems of multiculturalism the world has now moved to transnational cosmopolitanism. According to Miller this is inadequate because we cannot escape from our cultural identity completely. Material inequality such as income, education, health and housing etc can form an important factor of group identity but it cannot surpass or transcends race, gender, ethnic and national boundaries (Phillips, 2007). Globalization and Economic Volatility Another argument against globalization is that economic integration promotes instability by accelerating pace of change. This accelerated pace of change further weakens the vulnerable social system by putting extra pressure on it. With the growing pressure of global competition governments have lesser time to adjust to the changes in macro or external environment. This high economic vulnerability makes economic management mush more difficult especially for the developing countries. Markets can be volatile in the short run and in an attempt to respond to these balances equilibrium prices may go up leading to inflation. However financial markets rewards only sustainable and steady economic management in the long run. Many researchers link conflicts in the developing or underdeveloped countries with the policies of the international organizations such as World Bank and IMF. It is argued that the liberalization and privatization policies of World Bank and IMF are the source of economic instability in these countries which leads to conflict. Some researchers go to the extent of directly linking conflicts in Rwanda and Burundi in the decade of 90’s to the economic crisis caused by the IFI led reforms (Preet et al. 2000). An analysis of such arguments reveals that although economic reform policies are politically difficult decisions because it usually result in austerity and decline in consumption levels. Economic reforms do not bring quick results so government has to strike balance between various interest groups. We cannot link economic instability with globalization without a proof of solid mechanism through which economic factors affect the political factors. We cannot deny the impact of economic forces on politics but at best they provide the background in which various social and political factors interact with other. Many observers believe that the greatest negative impact of economic integration on political arena is the diminished role of the state and reduced national sovereignty. It reduces the degree of leverage by the governments to maintain and sustain their macroeconomic policies. The critics of economic integration believe that it not only aggravates economic inequality and economic volatility but also restricts government’s ability to address these issues (Gaston et al 2010). The problems and implications of economic integration and globalization on individual countries have been the most debated topics recently. With the onset of globalization both developed and developing countries are trying to explore and take advantage of these new opportunities and trying to adapt their economies according to the new changed external environment. The countries have been involved in trade and capital liberalization. The extent of gain and loss is different for each country depending on their ability to adapt and tap the opportunities. But an analysis of the world economies revealed that globalization has been especially beneficial for the already developed countries and developing countries are facing difficulties in adapting to the fast changing economic conditions hence making their economies more volatile (Cerqueira, et al. 2008) Conclusion After discussing different aspects of globalization and its impact on political, social and economic conditions of a country and analyzing the concept of global citizenship I have come to the conclusion that globalization has many positive and negative implications on an economy and country depending on a variety of factors. Different aspects of culture were also discussed. The analysis of different cultures and review of literature on them revealed that minority cultures and the reductionist view of the culture is the source of many conflicts and violence all over the world. Hence to tackle this recent violence, intolerance and inescapable hatred we need to concentrate on the commonalities among groups and cultures instead of the differences. It was observed that tolerance for minority cultures and hence harmony is possible through the concept of multiculturalism. Hence multiculturalism without culture is the solution for eradicating differences among cultures. It is also observed that cultures are highly permeable hence with globalization the increased encounters among cultures have resulted in cross cultural influences. Globalization has given rise to a phenomenon called global citizenship where it is difficult to tag an individual’s cultural tag. This trend is still in its initial phase but multiculturalism should be encouraged and tolerance for cultural diversity should be promoted and supported. Globalization is not without its own set of demerits. Economic integration is very beneficial for developed countries but especially harmful for developing countries. It leads to economic volatility which in turn leads to conflicts. The time for global citizenship may have arrived to counter violence and promote harmony but special measures should also be taken to safeguard the interest of minority groups and economies of the developing countries. References Bosselmann, K. (2008) The principle of sustainability: transforming laws and governance, England: Ashgate publications Cerqueira, P., Marques, H., Soukiazis, E. (2008) Perspectives on Integration and Globalization, UK: Transaction Publications Gaston, N., Ahmed, M. (2010) Globalization and Economic Integration: Winners and losers in Asia Pacific, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Giddens, A. (2010) Sociology: Introductory Reading, Cambridge: Polity Press Jackson Preece, J (2005) Minority Rights: Between diversity and community, Cambridge: Polity Press Miller, Max H., (2005) Worlds of capitalism, Institutions, governance and economic change in the era of globalization, New York: Routledge Phillips A. (2007) Multiculturalism without culture, Oxford: Princeton University Press Preet S. Aulakh, Michael J. Schechter (2000) Rethinking globalization(s): from corporate transnationalism to local intervention, New York: Palgrave Schattle, H. (2008) The practices of global citizenship, USA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Sen,A. (2006) Identity and Violence: the illusion of destiny, UK: Allen Lane Smith, D. (2008), Globalization, degradation and the dynamics of humiliation, Current Sociology, vol. 56, no 3, pp 371-379. Read More