R3) What is the relation between politics and globalization? / Juhee Kim

Summary

 The author defines the concept of globalization in political terms as multidimensional interconnection across borders. 

In particular, with regard to political globalization, the approach to post-national and transnational processes as well as space and time compression was emphasized. For some, while the process of political globalization opens up new possibilities of liberation, for others, globalization means loss of autonomy and division of the world community. 

The political globalization has been classified into three categories. It's the tension between world geopolitics, world norm culture, and pluralistic network. One of the reasons why political globalization has become common is the worldwide spread of democracy based on a parliamentary national anthem. Three dynamics of political globalization include changes in nationality and citizenship, public domain and political communication, civil society, space and borders. 

The change in state and civil rights will either disappear from the global market or replace it with the structure of a global government. Harbourmas insisted. "Communication is an open field of political and cultural competition, and there is no complete control by the state." That is, the civil society of politics connects to regional, global, and further transnational relations, and builds political forms around common factors such as competition, sustainability, human rights and social justice. It is important that the growth of the global civil society is the result of increased opportunities for exchanges between domestic and international politics.


Interesting Point

This sentence is the most interesting part of Reading3. 

"Instead of straggling to gain terriminal power over other states are strugling to control those have come home risks to states." Instead of struggling to gain territorial rights over other countries, most countries are struggling to control the state and companies that have become rivals.

Because to a certain extent, I agree. After all, world governance is somewhat related to the control of global corporations, and their influence cannot be ignored. 

The solution is for countries to share their sovereignty over companies with other countries. However, when approached from a different perspective, the author says that the sovereignty between countries should be handed over to non-governmental activists to achieve pluralistic rule. This is called civil socialization, where civil socialization permeates into international relations and national states mobilize actors of civil society. Examples include the legalization granted to Turkey's Kemalist elite by the U.S.-sponsored and transnationally organized NGOs and the youth movement mobilized to Westernize Ukraine and by the European Council's decision to support a ban on Turkey's Islamist parties.


Discussion

However, can the balance and checks of power work correctly if the world's power has been handed over to non-governmental organizations of action?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The history of globalization

is such fight visible in your country?

[Blog Project Assignment 2] Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory / Yang Ruixin