In What Significant Ways Does Globalization Shape our Political and Social World - Essay Example

?In what significant ways does globalization shape our political and social world? Introduction Globalization is one of such phenomena that are discussed frequently but are often not well-defined. In the broad context, globalization is an increase in the effect of such forces on the activities of humans that cover the national boundaries. Such activities include but are not limited to social, technological, economic, political, biological, and cultural. These are interacting and intertwining realms. Globalization as a phenomenon has been occurring for centuries and with the passage of time, has expanded from the inhabited regions’ colonization to the emergence of new nations, from the tuck fleet to the cargo planes, and from local manufacturing to global production. There is an on-going debate about the effects of globalization. Globalization is a matter of a lot of importance and interest in the present world affairs as it inspires passionate critics as well as supporters. There are five fundamental economic dimensions of globalization including migration, trade, aid, ideas, and finance. Whether increases in these dimensions if managed in a development supportive way for the countries can alleviate such evils as global poverty is debatable. This paper explores different facets of globalization in general and its political and social aspects in particular. The paper illustrates in what potential ways globalization has affected the society and what challenges have surfaced as a result of globalization in the political and social realms. Significance of historical shifts in social, political and economic structures and values in modern societies The social, political, and economic structures and values in the modern societies have undergone a revolutionary change with the passage of time, and the major cause of this change has been globalization. Let us consider the social acceptability toward homosexuality for instance. Historically, homosexuality has been largely practiced secretly, accounts of which can be found in the ancient Roman and Greek cultures. Till the first half of the 20th century, homosexuality remained a taboo in the society, and people practicing it tried to maintain it secretly because the Catholic Christian visualization of homosexuality was nothing less than an abominable act and a sin. In the present age, societies have become increasingly accepting toward homosexuality in most of the Western countries. People have started to visualize homosexuality as normal human behavior, and the gay activists have been successful in getting gay marriages legalized in many countries. In countries like the US, where it is still not legalized, there is an on-going debate, and there are fair chances for it to be legalized in the near future. Gay marriages have been legalized even in many developing countries like India. The element that has played a fundamental role in this change of the societal attitude toward homosexuality has been media. Homosexuality has been slowly and gradually incorporated into the culture and values of the modern society through television plays, movies, cinema, and theatre. On one hand, the status of marriage as a sacred institution supported by religion has been challenged since more and more gay couples are getting married. On the other hand, the society has drifted away from practicing religion in an attempt to keep pace with the globalization’s impact of society and modernization in particular. The divide between the practicing followers of religion and the modernists is one of the elements that lays the foundations of democracy so that all can have equal say in the establishment of the societal rules, norms, and values. The theories and ideas of the modern philosophers are quite unique and different from those of the philosophers of the past. The theorists of the contemporary age cannot make assumptions on the basis of an absolute overlying truth that was cultivated by their predecessors. The postmodern thought challenges the existence of a reality that is fixed and single. “Insofar as “social reality” emerges in various writing genres, investigation of how the world is apprehended requires inquiries into various pre-texts of apprehension, for the meaning and value imposed on the world is structured not by one’s immediate consciousness but by the various reality-making scripts one inherits or acquires from one’s surrounding cultural/linguistic condition” (Shapiro, 1989). Nowadays, people have started to accept a world with a co-existence of multiple realities. In such a world, the truth cannot be considered universal. The norms and values that are acceptable for one society may be unacceptable for another society. However, a common element across all societies is that there is increase of flexibility in acceptability of new ideas and their integration into the local norms and values. The new mode of thinking has heavily influenced a vast range of disciplines that include but are not limited to philosophy, literary criticism, and religious studies. “Even in International Relations, postmodern thought is beginning to have a major impact in scholarly discussions and is changing the way IR theorists look at the world” (Tsekos, 2008). Competing views on the impact of globalization on society and politics An extensive body of literature exists on the subject of globalization, and its influences on the political and social world that create unparalleled levels of migratory movements across the globe trigger the surfacing of such forms of financial institutions as remittances that are linked with migration and speed up the regional integration and cooperation. The academic scholarship of globalization can be categorized into different segments, each of which explores specific issues like the impact of levels of migration on the socio-economic conditions of the home as well as the host country, impact of remittances on the economic development, and the impact of globalization on cooperation among the countries all over the world. The scholarly research about globalization and its political and social impacts has created three different intellectual camps that have certain commonalities as well as differences. The first group of scholars is of the economists and political scientists that think that the effect of remittances on the developing countries is adverse. Numerous comprehensive studies, e.g. by Haas de Hain (2007), represent this academic group of scholars. The main argument of these scholars is that the remittances of workers have a temporal positive effect on the economy of the developing countries whereas the long-term effects are negative. They also argue that the complexity of remittances as a phenomenon necessitate considering not just their economic aspects but also various socio-political elements that are linked with remittance. These scholars not only use globalization’s economic analysis but also make an attempt to use alternative qualitative techniques like the temporal and partial analytical scales to determine remittance’s effect on the development. For instance, Haas de Hain (2007) argues that remittance can boost the economy of a country and alleviate poverty. Nevertheless, the effects on the development of society are unclear. In addition to that, the temporal and spatial analysis suggests that in spite of the fact that immigration and remittance yield favorable results for small communities, yet their contribution to the society as a whole is negligible. For the very reason, governments implement various political, economic, and social policies so that immigration and remittance can reveal to its optimal potential. The second group of scholars including Ivakhnyuk (2006) are a camp of scientists who emphasize the positive effects of remittance on the socio-economic development. The third academic group of scholars including Maimbo and Ratha (2005) believe in the mixed effects of remittance on successful development. “Politically, [globalization] can be seen as agenda-oriented, and having the capacity to influence or challenge an individual’s national identity” (Sischo, 2006, p. 3). The political implications of the transformation in the balance of power among different governments and international businesses are numerous. According to Strange (1996), globalization has caused the state to retreat. Hardt and Negri (2000) summon a totally different conceptual framework and almost commonly conclude that globalization has caused sovereignty to drift away from the state. Monbiot (2001) and Hertz (2002) emphasize upon the command globalization has provided the corporations with upon the state. On the other hand, Doremus et al. (1999) embark on the increasing importance of political culture and state as an outcome of globalization. A unique perspective is proposed by Thomas L. Friedman, who makes a logical yet conceptually loose approach to visualize the political impacts of globalization as constituting a stress between the fight for prosperity that calls for an embrace of globalization as well as the effort to sustain the community values. When analyzed together, all arguments highlight the differences between the ideological allies as well as the direct contradictions across the commentators. Globalization is loosely linked with the evacuation of the state, as argued by Jessop (1993). According to this perspective of the impact of globalization on politics, the national state is not so sidelined as a result of the complex stimuli that the scope of its hold upon the society would be reduced through privatization, establishment of semi-independent agencies in the government, delegation of work to other government levels, and contracting out of the work of the government. Holiday (2000) refutes the addition of these changes to a real shrinkage in the national state’s capacity. If all these accounts are considered together, they cause more puzzlement than bring the reality to the surface. In his book, Beck (2005) handles the matter of globalization’s impact on the politics by establishing a dichotomy between three different eras: the past, the present one, and the emerging era. Beck characterizes the past age as the first modernity, which was essentially an age in which people largely played according to the national sovereignty’s rules, and the court orders of the national governments were enforced inside the geographic boundaries where the national governments were free to do whatever they deemed right. The civil and corporate society inside those boundaries was subject to the national state’s rule. In the present age that is characterized as the second modernity; the national sovereignty’s power can be evaded as a result of the free flow of money and other kinds of resources including people and goods in the present age. Beck’s argument derives its novelty from the fact that rather than arguing that the second modernity is superior to the first modernity which brings forth the perception that national sovereignty exists no more, Beck visualizes the second modernity’s advent as marking the start of a meta-game of power, wherein there is a very important role of the national power and also the national sovereignty’s rules remain fully operative whereas the players in the second modernity, if they want so, are able to play according to the second modernity’s rules of free-wheeling. Beck argues that the corporate capital has been the major player in the meta-game so far, and further states that the political allies of the capital tend to impress upon the society that there is nothing more than this to globalization and that it forces the society to approve of the hegemony of the capital. As he notes, “The neo-liberal agenda is an attempt to capture the momentary historical gains of globally and politically mobile capital and fix them institutionally” (Beck, 2005, p. 5). Unlike Beck (2005), there is a whole range of commentators like Monbiot (2001) who project the view that national sovereignty belongs to the past and does not exist in the present age. A flip-side to the conceptual universe of Beck (2005) is that it allows not just the finance and capital, but also the national states and the civil society to play the meta-game. A more realistic visualization of the first modernity would suggest that it is inclusive of not just the national sovereignty but also a categorization of the powers across different levels of government. Impacts of globalization on the modern society Sharma (2005) conducted a comprehensive research to explore the effects of globalization on the modern society. Over the past century, there has occurred a global surge in the economic growth. The population of people that have lifted out of poverty has been more than ever before. Particularly, during the past three decades, there has been a considerable decline in the global poverty. Since the early 1970’s, development in two developing countries, India and China has significantly contributed to the elimination of poverty from the world. Nevertheless, the growth of economy across the world is uneven and unbalanced. “The economic growth has been concentrated just in fifteen wealthy countries. Whereas, eighty-nine other countries represent 1.6 billion people or one quarter of the world population are economically worse off than they were ten or more years ago” (Sharma, 2005, p. 27). With the spread and growth of globalization, further decline in the global poverty is expected. One of the most fundamental indicators and drivers of globalization is the growth of trade among countries across the globe. With the growth of trade, not only the societies have been able to comprehend one another’s culture and appreciate their similarities as well as differences better but have also benefited a lot from the trade with one another economically. Another very favorable and important result of globalization is the emergence of unique opportunities of employment that today plays a very important role in the economic development and empowerment of all countries in the world in general and the developing countries in particular. With the access to the Internet, people are not only able to learn foreign languages online but also build partnerships and joint ventures with people having diverse resources from all across the globe. This has become possible only as a result of globalization that people are able to do business together and move along despite their individualistic cultural and regional differences. Conclusion Globalization commenced specifically with colonialism and has been underway for centuries. The significance of the historical shifts in the social, political, and economic structures and values in modern societies is immense since the present world is fundamentally an outcome of these shifts. Globalization has caused a major shift in thinking whose fundamental effect has been lack of acceptance of the absolute truth. The postmodern thought has emerged gradually, and the date of its exact onset cannot be marked. However, numerous trends of the contemporary society can be intrinsically linked with the surfacing of the postmodern thought. Professionals and experts vary in their opinions regarding the effects of globalization. One of the groups visualizes globalization as a natural consequence of the advancement in the communication technology whereas another group adopts a more critical approach and visualizes globalization as an extensive capitalist movement and the spread of the values and ideas related to it. Globalization’s effects on society and politics are observed in the form of revolutionary change in the cultures, norms, and values of the modern societies across the globe. Where globalization has, on one hand, caused modernization of the society at large and has played an important role in drifting people away from their conservative religious beliefs and practices, globalization has also, on the other hand, helped in the development of better understanding and mutual harmony across different cultures and helped people understand one another better and appreciate their similarities and differences. The contemporary society is fundamentally an outcome of globalization and is heading toward increased integration and intertwining of different societies. Bibliography Beck, U 2005, Power in the Global Age, Cambridge: Polity. Doremus, PN, Keller, WW, Pauly, LW, and Reich, S 1999, The Myth of the Global Corporation, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Haas, de Hain 2007, Remittances, Migration, and Social Development: A Conceptual Review of the Literature, Social Policy and Development Programme, Paper 34. Hardt, M, and Negri, A 2000, Empire, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hertz, N 2002, The Silent Takeover: Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy, London: Arrow Books. Holliday, I 2000, Is the British State Hollowing Out?, The Political Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 2, pp. 167–176. Ivakhnyuk, I 2006, Migrations in the CIS Region: Common Problems and Mutual Benefits, International Symposium on International Migration and Development. Jessop, B 1993, Towards a Schumpeterian Workfare State? Preliminary Remarks on Post-Fordist Political Economy, Studies in Political Economy, Vol. 40, pp. 7–39. Maimbo, S, and Ratha, MD 2005, Remittances: Development Impact and Future Prospects, World Bank Publications. Monbiot, G 2001, Captive State: The Corporate Takeover of Britain, London: Pan. Shapiro, MF 1989, Textualizing Global Politics, International/Intertextual Relations, Ed. James Der Derian and Michael Shapiro, Washington D.C.: Lexington Books. Sharma, S 2005, Impact of Globalization on World Society, Academic Forum, Vol. 22, pp. 27-38, viewed 15 December 2012 at http://www.hsu.edu/uploadedFiles/Faculty/Academic_Forum/2004-5/2004-5AFImpact.pdf. Sischo, EN 2006, What is the impact of globalization on the continued relevance of national identity? Do we need a public service broadcaster and Australian content rules to ensure a functioning Australian democracy? Viewed 15 December 2012 at http://sydney.edu.au/law/tlc/docs/211020062211418ry4cq.pdf. Strange, S 1996, The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tsekos, ME 2008, The Rise of Postmodernism and the Globalization of Society, The Asrudian Center, viewed 15 December 2012 at http://asrudiancenter.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/the-rise-of-postmodernism-and-the-globalization-of-society/. Read More