It could be strongly argued that the Western world has never been stronger politically, economically, and militarily. Buzan and Segal push the idea that it is the West that has a control of political and economical ideas within which the present civilizations develop. They argue that the universal world is dominated by Western ideals in what they term as a “Westernistic age”. “Westernistic” doesn’t mean the same as “Western”; rather it means a structure, in which the form or the frame for the future development of the world is set by the West, but not necessarily the concrete content (Buzan And Segal, 1998).
The global world discussed by many writers that has evolved creates global, national and local issues for those involved or excluded from the global market. In recent times there has been a shift away from traditional states and nations and the fruition of a global economy which has had great impact; both positive and negative on humanity and societies. The advocates say globalization brings the first real chance of prosperity to the impoverished corners of the world, “Globalisation, then, is growth-promoting. Growth, in turn, reduces poverty. ...the iberalization of international transactions is good for freedom and prosperity.” – London School of Economics). Opponents say globalization is the cause of growing poverty and inequality on the planet, “Globalization breaks old ties and roots, overthrows and upsets life styles, production, reproduction and consumerism models... modifies lands, creates new frontiers and discriminations. It builds new hierarchies, privileges, injustice in every corner of the planet: nothing can escape from this powerful machine, that has the same strength of the primary accumulation” (http://www.ainfos.ca/A-Infos97/2/0425.html). Those in the middle see how unbridled globalization could wreak havoc on some while simultaneously opening the doors of opportunity to others. The issue of how globalization has impacted upon the third world is addressed by Kofi Annan, “Personally, I do not believe that those [poor] people are victims of globalisation. Their problem is not that they are included in the global market but, in most cases, that they are excluded from it.” Whilst some argue that globalization leaves the third world depleted and impoverished, others argue that the only way for the third world to overcome poverty is to become involved in the global market.
Roland Robertson’s bases his global thinking around four main subsystems; being, economic, political, social and cultural. Robertson argues that for some time there has been global activity within each subsystem and due to the compression of the world we now a part of one global society. Robertson also puts forward the idea of ‘global consciousness’ being the individual’s knowledge or understanding of a wider world and how this global obligation plays a role in the individual’s everyday life. It is interesting to note that earlier in his writings, Robertson discussed hindrances to complete globalisation being religious (Muslim/Christian) and legal-diplomatic (East/West) Divide. However Robertson now believes that due to the ‘compression of the world’ and ‘global consciousness’ the world has become global in essence.
The strength and control of multi-national companies also is an issue that must be considered when discerning whether we are a part of one world or many separate worlds. “Globalization will surely result in economic gains for many and losses for others; but regrettably, globalization also implies the weakening of the capacity of nation states to shape their own economic destinies, and confers those powers instead to the leaders of the global marketplace”. (James W. Thomson) Thompson clearly advocates the thought that due to globalization, the nation state has been weakened considerably and a global world has developed. In ‘Land of the Giants’, Harvey explores the relationship between governments and corporate companies and how each influence and exert culture and beliefs on one another. Due to the difficulties involved with policing major international takeovers, the global world has allowed larger and subsequently more powerful companies to dominate the global market and thus exert major influence and control on governments, “A major employer, anywhere, has a great deal of clout with local authorities and governments which are eager to retain investment and jobs” (Harvey, 1995:181). Harvey also explores the way in which multi-nationals have taken the global market away from its capitalist, free-market based heritage and it has now become almost a cartel system, whereby monopolisation occurs and thus, the consumer ultimately loses.
The question of one world versus separate worlds has implications on comparative politics. Many argue that the nation-state’s power has been eroded and replaced by a global market and economy, does this then make comparing politics and societies obsolete or a waste of time? Buzan and Segal, Fukuyama and also Robertson argue that due to the compression of the world brought about by Wars, advanced technology and communication and improved transport and the subsequent ‘opening up’ of the global marketplace for rapid global expansion, one global world has evolved. The role of the Japanese illustrate that countries can be apart of the modern, global marketplace without necessarily adopting completely Western ideals. The role of multi-national companies in pursuing and implementing Western ideology throughout the world must be noted, however modernization does not always have to be Western based, as Japan show. Huntingdon’s argument that we are still looking at separate civilizations that are not all accepting Western values is an argument somewhat confirmed by the recent events in Iraq and North Korea. Whilst I would argue that a global world is in the process of evolution and that countries are being somewhat forced into a global market and thus, the adoption of Western ideals, I would argue that we are still looking at separate worlds and cultures within and without of the global world. Japan demonstrate that there are separate worlds within the global economy, whilst opposition and disillusionment with the West throughout the world illustrate that we are still looking at, and comparing separate worlds.
1,471 words
Bibliography
Buzan and Segal (1998), ‘Anticipating the Future’, Simon and Schuster.
Harvey, R. (1995) ‘The Return of the Strong’.
Thompson, J.W. (2002), The Future of Globalization, ‘Business and Society Review’ Volume 107, Issue 4, Page 423.
(Society, Individual Man, and Education, : 1998)
Stubbs, R. and G.R.D. Underhill (eds) (1994) Political Economy and the Changing Global Order London: Macmillan.
‘One World… Many Worlds and Globalization’, http://www.ainfos.ca/A-Infos97/2/0425.html
