Globalisation and British Politics - Essay Example

Globalisation and British Politics Introduction Politics can be moulded by the evolving process of change brought about by certain events such as globalisation. Globalisation pertains to the commonwealth and consolidation of the joining countries’ acculturation, resources, and communications and transportation infrastructures. Globalisation concerns the nation’s entire attributes in terms of social, cultural, economic, ecological as well as political aspects. This is achieved through investments at the multinational level with goals of peace and order amongst nations while prospering its growth and development in terms of communications and information technology, besides provision of a free market involving the local, regional or national business sectors. In terms of the political aspect in one country, the idea of globalisation or creation of a world government was first described by Dante Alighieri, an Italian writer in the 14th century, as a centralised global constitution governing laws which promotes international peace and order. Oppositions however argued against international understanding wherein the authority and command of a government within its jurisdiction especially in terms of environment and economics will be influenced by external control (Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia, 2003). The word globalisation had been used to offer clarification, significance and knowledge about the essential characteristics of new age capitalism (Murphy, 1994). It suggests several discrete processes and developments which involves the international level and joins them into one centrally dominant procedure of change. Substantial interest focuses on the practical application of information technology into the procedure of production with the simultaneous action in the process of changing the administration, system and communications which is at the commercial, communal and state levels. This paper will argue whether or not globalisation determines what is possible in British politics. Discussion Extent of globalisation Today’s views of the politics with the influence of globalisation have raised arguments as presented by Giddens (as quoted by Hay &Watson, 1999). One side, the radicals debate over the situation on the global aspect that is constantly remoulded and reformed by current trends brought about by globalisation in the political economy displacing the traditional sovereignty of a nation or state. On the other hand, the sceptics argue about the certainty and basis of the gathered facts from previous experiments and observations since these global flows are in itself doubtful claiming a world without limits in terms of globalisation simply stating there had been no occurrence of change. When talking about the extent of the operation of globalisation, one sees it to be the unavoidable consequent flow of economy, information and technology, and people and interplay of their role in a single huge global market. Furthermore, Giddens stated that the term in itself spread to almost every parts of the world which came from nowhere. Regarding with the distribution of globalisation in terms of capital flows, it should be noted that its flow courses unidirectional from the top consisting mainly of those capable of investments down to consumers which pay for the other’s investment returns. Experiencing globalisation is more empowering to the capitalists but otherwise to the consumers of goods and services hence, inequality. Giddens asserted that nowadays, globalisation is nearly not worth mentioning since its extension has merely molded us of what we are today (Giddens, 1997). Globalisation in British Politics Globalisation implicitly decides and influences the boundaries of social knowledge which political subjects are incapable of controlling thus making them lame before the face of changes. Additionally, through the radicals’ perspective, globalisation has been considered as part of the common sense of human being and is accepted to occur as the way how things are indicating that people have no options in choosing which side to take. Moreover, globalisation have imparted that it is an essential component of the economics and that what this process is bringing to us is part of the reality that people have to face. As regards to the process of globalisation in conjunction with British democracy, Giddens (1997) noted that democracy of globalisation and globalisation of democracy pertains to two different things. The first is being defined as the democratization of procedures of multinational democratic governments which can be useful in obtaining a regulated law within the economic system and a common good to the world’s environment. The second one refers to distribution of democratic government which is more realistic and achievable now than the other one. Giddens (1997) cited that effects of globalisation are not exclusively consistent. He argued that the 1997 British general elections which resulted in an overwhelming electoral victory but a surprising downfall in turnout. He credited this as an outcome of decline in belief, trust, and assurance of the people to the elected officials in institutions or government agencies. In his lecture, Giddens recognized how one country or nation has lost its authority to govern its state and also the loss of influence of the political officials to events. Hay & Watson however, refuted Giddens’ argument, stating that we have the option to choose and we can do much more about globalisation (1997). The establishment of worldwide military regulations has the capacity to limit the scope of rules existing to the government administration and their people. The fact that democracy started in institutions and reached its way to the national level, it is to be considered also that democracy can be established within the international level. Deliberate prioritization must be devoted to groups, administrative units, unions, and institutions that extend their capability for independent command via an apt remoulding of the territorial dominion of organization of liability, representation and regulation and strengthened by international social, economic and civil rights bills (Held, 1992). Political economy in the setting of globalisation Globalisation, as Cox (1987) argued ranks the domestic and local markets as inferior and secondary to a larger scale global economic system. While some view globalisation process as permanent which could label the traditional practices and strategies in the section of capitalism as obsolete and out of date, some would think otherwise. According to Held, globalisation can lead to multiple steps that may affect a nation’s growth and development. It brings a new organizational system in global economy regulated by international decrees where it is not influenced or controlled by one country or nation. There will be up-rating of the technology particularly in communications which will be helpful in connecting within the country or interlinking with other countries. There will then be regulation of the range of authority and power of the most influential and dominant countries (1992). The materialization of laissez-faire during the period of industrial capitalism had paved the way to separation of the polity and economy with the benefits of legal and political rights on agreement and assets. As stated by Corrigan and Sayer, the government revolution in England during the 1740 1850s the political economy became lead to breakthrough of economy which was contended as a self-supporting classified domain regulated by the rules of the economic market and politicization of moral regulations (1985). Likewise, Wolfe stated that with the advent of contemporary business companies in the United States of America in the 19th century, this cannot be considered as an accomplishment of laissez-faire. Rules and regulations could only be modified if the constituents that accepted and approved these laws were controlled. This means that if a business firm is to transfer out of the public sector into the private sphere, the businessmen have to go through the public sectors first. Paradoxically, a political fight had to be battled so as to put an essential organization beyond the scope of politics such that someone must have the authority in the state so as to render it powerless (1977). In order to truly understand what globalisation can bring, it is important to have knowledge on the course on which path the process of globalisation is taking. There are however, several notions and assumptions that may guide or divert people as well as policy-makers in understanding globalisation. Social organizations, movements and organized labour are all considered fundamental to frames of politics presently perceived and exercised. However, the philosophical doctrine of globalisation have the tendency to generate the notion of demise of politics and also the termination of the nation-state. Change in technology is the forefront and exhibited to be the force which drives globalisation. It is the innovation and use of latest invention in technology that precedes a change from the traditional way to a more modern lifestyle. The crisis brings about unstable situations which marks the transition of the state and political institutions to strive to catch up to current trends. Thus, globalisation is envisioned in a philosophy where change brought about by technology is considered as the trend and everybody must conform. Globalisation is bordered with the sense of it being essentialistic or requirement. Events cited as regards to the economic situations like the crises in oil, break-up of the Bretton Woods, and other similar events are understood to be due to the need of the involved societies to compel to the change brought about by globalisation in order for the country to move forward. They view this as if there are other possible substitutes. It is to note with the belief that it is the social conditions and relationships that mould the product of intricate socially established situations such as globalisation. Next is the idea of convergence wherein from different institutional foundations and differing in originations, societies more likely come together and become alike. Take for instance the overlapping at the nation-state level because its boundaries are surpassed and exceeded by globalisation in terms of economics, manufacturing and commerce (Ohmae, 1990). It is believed that development of technology within the economic systems is marked by the advent of quicksilver capital (McKenzie, 1991) as well as modern structures in the global market (Strange, 1988). The quick growth and proliferation of technology is equivalent to the thought with finality that a corporation goes global (Gill & Law, 1988). Likewise, there is homogenisation of one’s culture and tradition with simultaneous destruction of the customary cultural boundaries by the emerging technology (Robertson, 1992). The worldwide competition had become the central idea in the world of business initiating then the emergence of arguments regarding the path to be undertaken in the 21st century as regards to business organization, manufacture of products and labour procedures (Porter, 1992), and the accurate course for nation-states as well (Reich, 1990). It is said that globalisation has directed us to the path from the former thought of union connecting the East with the West towards achieving a social democratic stage through management of the state itself, to an assumed linking among nations from the North, East, West, and South in the direction of a neoliberal economic market society in which the authority to business corporations were displaced from the state and labour. Globalisation can also be presented demonstrated instrumentally since it tends to describe change in more simplified terms so as to recommend various propositions to deal with change more successfully. Arguments on changes brought about by the process of globalisation have involved scholarly investigations analyzing management of business as well as their sets of standard and also the political activities and efforts. Thus bringing together educational remarks, guidelines discussion and business approach making these disciplines more strongly joint (Pollert, 1991). This brings now to the outcome that is immersion not only with tactical commerce management but also with political tactical management of crisis. With this instrumentality comes the role of quite a trick from the political discipline. During the late 1970s and 1980s There is a choice on the part of the government authorities on how to deliver to the community the change of liberalization and lessen or guard down the barriers to commerce and pave the way to global money. The officials of the government typically assume that liberalization would bring more good intention by increasing the cumulative wealth of the state which outbalances the costs i.e. decrease in salaries and increase in number of unemployed individuals in manufacturing companies that are confronted with effects of competition. This way, the public would question on the cost thus government opt to state that the changes in the global market have no other alternatives to offer but liberalization (powerless state, 1995). Within the level of business and mass media, this theory is instrumentally introduced to the people within the society in forms of advertisements for almost everything produced by the business sectors. They utilize the products of technology such as the television, radio, or the internet. As what they always promote and encourage, we have to have these necessary products whether it may be in the forms of good or services so as to be ready and furnish ourselves as we enter the life in a global community. Lastly, globalisation is described as a benign progression. Conflict within the social level can only be experienced in the adjustment phase and does not go beyond this stage. New techniques are being employed so as to provide empowerment on the side of the laborer, the development of union of interests or purposes, and also the comeback of yeoman democracy (Piore & Sabel). Linking of nations with globalisation One example that was cited about the all-encomassing nature of globalisation is Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan has been successful in having harmonious relationship in the fields of economy, governance, and its society. Today, Kazakhstan is regarded as having a strong socio-economical foundation because of its having a steady increase in its gross domestic product. It is the main supplier of oil exports in the European Union. The agreeable relationship of the socio-economic and political divisions in the country has been due to internal political organization and solidity. Although in its 1995 constitution, two powers were given, to the President and to the Prime Minister, in 2004, an additional authority emerged in the form of a Security Council (Adilov, n.d.). Also, with Kazakhstan’s geographical location and promising products to offer, it strives to equilibrise with its adjacent Muslim countries, and also the West, Russia, and China countries as well. It envisions of a multi-vectorial international agreement with these countries. Through this, a closer link to several countries could be possible with the agenda of partnership rather than competition. Democracy can only be attained with successful economic and stable social systems. The media had been regulated or limited in delivering news that would degrade the office of the authorities. Kazakhstan political system, even if it is flawed can eventually arrive at democratic country because globalisation implies a long-term tendency towards achieving democracy (Dave, 2007). Meanwhile, in contrast to linking countries with the intention of cooperation from each member, some groups are opposed to this change. For instance, the incidence that happened in Uzbekistan in 2005 which killed hundreds or thousands of people led to abduction and imprisonment by security forces of Uzbek of AbduMannob Polat, an Uzbek and Director of the Central Asian Human Rights Information Network of the United States NGO Union of Councils, previous chairman of Uzbekistan Human Rights Society and previous affiliate of Birlik political organization, due to his being a chairman on a international league of human rights in Central Asia. The killing incident was believed to come from revolt of the Islamic terrorists. Uzbekistan, like Kazakhstan was geographically located where access to neighboring huge countries is possible. It is linked with China, Russia, South Asia and the Middle East. Aside from its location, it also possesses natural resources in the form of gas, uranium. Also it is the most densely populated in the Central Asia. With these conditions, internal conflicts have rise due to inadequate supply of water, energy and land which made the governance of the country unstable. Along with this instability is the emergence of Islam terrorist and extremist nationalist government. The US offered its support to stabilizing the country so as not to put US’ interest at risk. The incident in Andijan however has shaken the relationship between the two countries. Flaws on the policy have been reviewed and some proposals include changes on policies regarding civil society, liberty, and human rights that had formerly centred on terrorist opposition organizations (Polat, 2007). Alternative for globalisation With the thought that globalisation is a part of common sense, the only means for the economy within the national level can move forward and be competitive internationally is to get relative advantage by considering lesser work expenses. However it is to be noted that this economic thought is not already used by successful capitalist with political economy at the international level. Rather, they prefer to upgrade and deal more with the quality of their product and not dwell on the cost of production. By this, the argument on having no alternative has been proven invalid because the public and the private sectors have the luxury to choose among alternatives whichever could bring a better outcome (Giddens, 1997). The future with globalisation With the displacement of the foundations of obsolete order, it is viewed that clash or disagreement is a reversible and short term temporary consequence of reconstitution. In the process, globalisation does not tend to cause harm but only an independent procedure that exceeds the political. As was stated by the director of OECD, globalisation arrived and will remain (1992). It is the job of the public and private sectors to take what globalisation is in store for them and adjust to the changes especially the new responsibilities that it may bring. The increasing awareness on the discipline of academe has exposed people to the unrelenting components of heterogeneity, divergence, difference and disagreements. Modern philosophies regarding institutional economics and also sociological economics brought up relevant pertinent inquiries regarding the entrenchment of traditional social patterns and the characteristic nature of change both socially and historically (Hodgson, 1994). Also, there is increasing interest on nationwide trajectories in common interests and industrial reformatting (Zysman, 1996). Research studies and examinations have been active in determining all about change (Mittelman, 1995). Consequently, information from mere stories without support of evidence have been subjected to interrogations and queries so as to expose and reveal to the public the political hazard that it may bring (Mittelman, 1996). There had been efforts to disclose these types of misleading notions to the populace via the media (Hutton, 1995). Conclusion Globalisation has a wide impact in a country’s economic, political, social, and cultural values, and these were reflected in British politics as well. With acceptance of globalisation, it can lead to changes in these aspects: global market can bring about competition in the economic sector, democracy and liberty can eventually set change within the political sector, and lifestyle modification in terms of the country’s social and cultural components. Globalisation per se is not harmful. The British would just have to play it right and with the acceptance of change, bind the nation to the obligation that comes with it. The government leads the state in introduction of globalisation but it does not mean that this process is unidirectional. The democratic government consults its people, lays down the pros and cons of the proposed topic and its people should respond keeping in mind and weighing the benefits versus the destruction that it would bring. Everyone has the responsibility to be sensitive to the change that is happening around them. Reference Adilov, M. (n.d.) “Organ pri prezidente ili tretii tsentr vnimaniia?” Available at Corrigan, P & Sayer (1985), D. The Great Arch: English State Formation as Cultural Revolution, Oxford, p. 105. Cox, R. (1987) Production, Power and World Order, New York, pp. 253, 258 Dave, B. (2007) The EU and Kazakhstan: Balancing Economic Cooperation and Aiding Democratic Reforms in the Central Asian region. CEPS Policy Brief (http://www.ceps.eu) Encarta Encyclopedia Standard 2003 Giddens, A. (1997) cited in John Lloyd, `Interview: Anthony Giddens', New Statesman Gill, S & Law, D. (1988) The Global Political Economy , Harvester/Wheatsheaf Hay, C & Watson. M. (1999) Globalisation: `Sceptical' Notes on the 1999 Reith Lectures. The Political Quarterly Publishing Co. Ltd. Held, D. (1992) "Democracy: From City-states to a Cosmopolitan Order?", Political Studies, XL, Special issue pp. 32-4 Hodgson, G. (1994) The Economics of Institutions Edward Elgar; &. Smelser, N. & Swedberg, R. (1994) (Eds), Handbook of Economic Sociology Princeton University Press Hutton W. (1995) The State We're In, Jonathan Cape La Technologie et l'economie, les relations determinantes sur les facteurs techniques de la globalisation' OECD, 1992 McKenzie, R. & Lee, D. (1991) Quicksilver Capital: How the Rapid Movement of Wealth has Changed the World, Free Press Mittelman, (1995) (Ed.), Globalisation: Critical Reflections; Ruigrok, W & Tulder, R. The Logic of International Restructuring: The Management of Dependencies in Rival Industrial Complexes Routledge; and Jones, Globalisation and Interdependence. Mittelman, (1996) Globalisation: Critical Reflections; and Paul Hirst & Grahame Thompson, Globalisation in Question Polity Press Murphy, C. (1994) International Organization and Industrial Change: Global Governance since 1850, Polity Press Ohmae. K (1990) The Borderless World: Power and Strategy in the Interlinked Economy Collins Panitch, L. (1994) Globalisation and the State. The Sociologist Register. Piore & Sabel, The Second Industrial Divide Polat, A. (2007) Reassessing Andijan: The Road to Restoring U.S.-Uzbek Relations. The Jamestown Foundation Pollert, A. (1991)Farewell to Flexibility, Blackwell Porter, M. (1992) The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Macmillan Reich, R. (1992) The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21st Century Capitalism (Knopf,); & Cerny, P. (1990) The Changing Architecture of Politics: Structure, Agency and the Future of the State, Sage Robertson, R. (1992) Globalisation: Social Theory and Global Culture Sage Strange, S. (1988) States and Markets: An Introduction to International Political Economy Pinter 'The myth of the powerless state,' The Economist, 7 October 1995, pp. 15-16. Wolfe, A. (1977) The Limits of Legitimacy, New York, p. 22. Zysman, J. (1996) 'The Myth of a "Global" Economy: Enduring National Foundations and Emerging Regional Realities', New Political Economy, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 157-84. See also Esping-Andersen, G. (1996) (Ed.), Welfare States in Transition: National Adaptations in Global Economies, Sage Read More