The Global Interstate System

The state has traditionally been the subject of most interest to scholars of global politics
because it is viewed as “the institution that creates warfare and sets economic policies for a
country.” Furthermore, the state is a political unit that has authority over its own affairs. In
other words, its borders are recognized by other countries. It is assumed that whoever is in
charge of those borders has the right to determine exactly what is going to happen in their
county. The Treaty of Westphalia of 1648 established the notion of the nation-state and the
idea of state sovereignty. Today, the globalization of politics created an atmosphere where the
ideas of the nation-state, state sovereignty, government control, and state policies are
challenged from all sides.

With globalization, some scholars suggest a decrease in the power of the state and that
other actors are actually becoming more powerful. These actors include multinational
corporations and global civil society organizations, like the Red Cross, that cross national
boundaries.

Is the idea of the nation-state outdated in the contemporary world? If so, what is it that
we need to think about as “replacements”? In this chapter, we will look at regional alliances
and worldwide organizations of states. This manifests the efforts of countries and governments
in the world to cooperate and collaborate together. Next, international and regional economic
bond bodies, such as IMF and the World Bank, must also be considered as they often push for
neoliberal reforms in the world. The third kind of replacement to the traditional nation-state
and the idea of national autonomy comes from the non-state actors. One of these is the private
capital groups, including banks and groups of people, with money that can determine the well-
being of people in a particular area. Multinational corporations and non-governmental
organizations, such as the Amnesty International, are significant organizations that put into
questions the strength of national autonomy and global politics. The emergence of non-state
organizations, like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and terrorist organizations, which seek power try to depose a
government and replace the system with their own ideological belief.
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE IN TH TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY

There is a series of specific factors behind the emergence of global governance. The first
on the list must be the declining power of nation-states. If states themselves were “highly
contingent and in flux” (Cerny, 2007, p. 854), it would open the possibility of the emergence of
some form of global governance to fill the void.

A second factor is the vast flows of all sorts of things that run into and often right
through the borders of nation-states. This could involve the flow of digital information of all
sorts through the internet. It is difficult, if not impossible, for a nation-state to stop such flow
and in any case, it is likely that such action would be politically unpopular and bring much
negative reaction to the nation-state involved in such an effort. For example, China’s periodic
efforts to interfere with the internet have brought great condemnation both internally and
externally.

Then, there is mass migration of people and their entry, often illegally, into various
nation-states. If states are unable to control this flow, then there is a need for some sort of
global governance to help deal with the problem. The flow of criminal elements, as well as their
products (drugs, laundered money, those bought and sold in sex trafficking, etc.) is a strong
factor in the call for global governance (Levy and Sznaider, 2006). In these cases and others,
there is a need for some degree of order, some sort of effective authority, and at least some
potential for the improvement of human life. These are but a few of the things that can be
delivered by some form of global governance.

Another set of issues that has led to calls for global governance involves horrendous
events within nation-states that the states themselves either foment and carry out, or are
unable to control (Nordstrom, 2004). For example, in Darfur, Sudan, perhaps hundreds of
thousands have been killed, millions of people displaced, and the lives of many disrupted in a
conflict that date back to early 2003. The government of Sudan and its military have been
implicated in the conflict between ethnic and tribal groups and the Sudanese government has
been resistant to outside interference in its internal affairs. One could even go back to WWII
and argue that the Holocaust could have been prevented, or at least mitigated, had there been
a viable from of global governance to put pressure on Nazi Germany and ultimately, to
intervene in a more material way, perhaps militarily (Bauman, 1998).

Then, there are global problems that single nation-state cannot hope to tackle on their
own. One is the global financial crises and panic that sweep the world periodically, which
nations are often unable to deal with on their own (Strange, 1996). Indeed, some nations (e.g.,
the nations of Southeast Asia) have often been, and are being, victimized by such crises. Unable
to help themselves, such nations are in need of assistance from some type of global
governance.

Nation-states have long struggled to deal with problems like there through various
interstate systems (e.g., alliances such as NATO), but the more recent trend is toward the
development of more truly global structures and methods of dealing with various sorts of issues
and problems.

EFFECTS OF GLOBALIZATION TO GOVERNMENTS

One of the key aspects of state sovereignty is the government. It is a group of people
who have the ultimate authority to act on behalf of a state. Each state has its own right to self-
determination and that other country should not intervene in the affairs of that state unless
there are extraordinary reasons to do so. Other countries must recognize sovereignty or the
right to govern one’s own territorial borders. Each state is autonomous unto itself and
responsible within its own system of government to those who are governed. The decisions, the
conflict, and the resolution of that conflict are done through the institutions of government
established and codified in that particular state, whether or not through elections. Elections,
especially in democratic society, provide the leadership of the state. In addition, the policy is
developed and implemented in the interest of the people of a state by a specific government. A
civil society within a state can also act as a counterweight or as a supplement to government.
Civil society includes the private economy, educational institutions, churches, hospitals,
fraternal organizations, and other non-profit organizations.

There have been several challenges to the government and ultimately, to state
autonomy. We can divide these challenges into four: traditional challenges, challenges from
national or identity movements, global economics, and global social movements.

TRADITIONAL CHALLENGES

External intervention can generally be described as invasion by other countries. For

example, when Saddam Hussein was the ruler of Iraq 1990, he decided he was going to take
over the oil fields of Kuwait. He invaded Kuwait and took it over. As a result, he was dislodged
by an international coalition led by the United States.

These days, we can see external intervention in other forms. Russia’s external
intervention into the affairs of Ukraine, a sovereign state in the post-Soviet era, is another
instance of intervention in the autonomy of the state. Russia intervenes in the affairs of people
in Crimea who want to become part of Russia again even though they are part of Ukraine.
Crimea declared its independence from Ukraine and re-affiliated with Russia. This is a case of
how there might be a national identity within a country that is assisted by a neighboring
country. Ukraine argues to have autonomy to determine the case for Crimea. As a result, there
is current conflict between Ukraine, not recognizing Crimea’s sovereignty, and Russia, not
recognizing Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea.

Internal political challenges can also happen. For example, after the Arab Spring in
Egypt, a new constitution was created and a government was elected. That government was
more fundamentalist and rejected the notion of a plural society that included religious
diversity. The military staged a coup that deposed the government in order to restore stability.
Other examples include the Taliban’s efforts to control the government of Afghanistan. In Syria,
the original rebellion against Assad came from the country’s own internal dissenters who
wanted to replace the government even though they were also Syrian nationals.

There are also regional organizations challenging state autonomy. The United Nations
intervened in Sudan because of the several years of civil war. More recently in Europe,
specifically in Greece, it also interfered in the Greek debt crisis.

CHALLENGES FROM NATIONAL/IDENTITY MOVEMENTS

The next challenges are part of a national identity or movement. It is important to know
that a nation has cultural identity that people attached to, while a state is a definite entity due
to its specific boundaries. However, different people with different identities can live in
different states. For example, the Kurds reside in several different countries including Iraq, Iran,
and Turkey. The Catalans live primarily in Spain but we can also find some of them in France.
Scottish nationalism is another example that challenges the traditional notions of state
sovereignty. In 2014, Great Britain had a vote in Scotland to decide whether Scotland was going
to become its own autonomous state apart from Great Britain. They voted against it but
Scotland has a significant degree of autonomy now as compared to more than two decades
years ago.

Global movements, such as the Al-Qaeda and ISIS, are another example of national or
identity movements. In this case, they are structured around the fundamentalist version of
Islam.

GLOBAL ECONOMICS

The third major source of challenge comes from global economics. Global economy
demands the states to conform the rules of free-market capitalism. Government austerity
comes from developments of organizations that cooperate across countries, such as WTO and
regional agreements, such as NAFTA, the European Union (EU), and the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

Neoliberal economics or neoliberal capitalism started in the 1980s. It focuses on free

trade and dismantling trade barriers. It made sure that governments did not impose restrictive
regulations on corporate presence, as well as on the free flow of capital and jobs. Free trade
was seen as the ideal or the normative belief, that is, the best economy is one where there is
free trade everywhere. Laws and standards that would interfere with the flow of capital in a
particular country, including environmental regulations, were deemed to discourage economic
growth. Neoliberal economics requires a state to cooperate in the global market through the
free flow of capital, the privatization of services, and fiscal austerity or constraint. In turn, the
government’s role is diminished as it relates to the market. Neoliberal economics is seen as a
threat, in general, because a state cannot protect its own economic interest as a sovereign
state.

A specific example to expand global economic influence is the use of IMF and the World
Bank in forcing government reforms in poorer country. Furthermore, the regional economic
development efforts focused on expanding free trade and market liberalization. Businesses
from developed countries put their factories and pay people to build factories and produce
goods in developing countries worldwide. These corporations will sell the products in
developing countries. This exacerbate rising inequality in the world. Greece is one example that
explains how neoliberal economics can threaten the sovereignty of a state. It began in 1981
when Greece joined the EU. As a larger alliance, the EU broke down all kinds of barriers among
its member states, including Greece, like passports, visas, and license plates. It allowed people
to travel across European borders and encouraged economic cooperation and collaboration of
member states. Twenty years later, Greece adopted the euro as its own currency and got rid of
the drachma. The government of Greece borrowed money for infrastructure improvements,
largely linked to their hosting of the 2004 Olympics. This put Greece in a large debt. In 2007 and
2008, the worldwide financial crisis made Greece’s economy to collapse.

Aside from high debt that burdened the government, Greece had several of its
employees struggling with pensions. Tax revenues were lower, and as a result, they could not
pay their debts back. In 2009, their credit dropped which made it harder for them to pay back
their debt. This led to a series of austerity packages in Greece which meant that there was less
government spending. IMF bailed them out from the crisis in exchange for more austerity. In
conclusion, economic crises can force government to subscribe to the terms and conditions of
the global financial market and of other nations that can help them regain economic stability.
GLOBAL SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

Finally, we have global social movements. Most of the time, they are not seen as a
threat but they definitely challenge state sovereignty. Social movements are movements of
people that are spontaneous or that emerge through enormous grassroots organization. These
social movements are transnational movements which means they occur across countries and
across borders. Therefore, states have less control over them.

For example, human rights movements create a public sentiment, value, and agenda.
The idea is that there are certain rights that states cannot neglect or generally, what we call
human rights. If a country decides that they are going to have a particular policy and if that
policy violates the international standard of human rights, there is a challenge to the ability of
states to fully implement it. An example is the United States’ position on the death penalty.
There is an international consensus, with a few dissenting countries like China, South Africa,
and Russia, against the death penalty. This means that if somebody is sentenced by death
penalty and somehow he is in a country around the world, there are rules against that state
extraditing into the United States.

The environmental movement is another example of global social movements related to

public policy. A specific case is the so-called Blockadia or the state where social movements
emerging in local areas fight back as a response to the controlling efforts by the apparatus of
government to protect the interest of neoliberal capitalists. Consensus on women’s rights is
another example in many countries. Arguably, the biggest conflict between the West and the
fundamentalist Islam is over the role of women in society, as well as women’s autonomy. Rights
of personal autonomy are another example and this includes issues on homosexuality, same-
sex marriage, and gender equality.

There is also an increased role in international organizations like the United Nations and
the International Criminal Court in Hague, the role of non-governmental organizations like
Doctors without Borders or Amnesty International, and the role of global media.
ACTIVITY: DEBATE

The issue of whether or not the nation-state is still relevant today in the era of
globalization has gained different reactions. Some scholars would argue that its role in global
politics is diminishing. On the other hand, others would say that it still remains to be the
primary actor in political affairs. In this activity, you should be able to point out contending
views about such through a debate.

1. Divide the class into two groups- affirmative side and negative side.
2. The central issue would be: The state remains to be relevant amid the processes and
structures of globalization.
3. Each side would be given 20 minutes to prepare their arguments.
4. The affirmative side will present their main arguments within 10 minutes. The same rule
applies for the negative side.
5. After the presentation of arguments, each side will be given 2 minutes to ask the
opposing side.
6. The opposing side will have 2 minutes to construct an answer. Then, they should be able
to answer within 3minutes.
7. Finally, both sides will have 3 minutes each to present their final statement about the
issue.

INSTITUTIONS THAT GOVERN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

There are several international organizations that governments of countries around the
world and individuals participate in. These include the United Nations, the International
Court of Justice, NAFTA, and NATO. There are also non-governmental organizations
promoting social economic growth. Let us look at them one by one.

PEACE TREATIES AND MILITARY ALLIANCES: THE UN AND NATO

Global politics entails relationship of countries and different governments and non-
governmental organizations. The United Nations (UN) is one of the leading political
organizations in the world where nation-states meet and deliberate. However, it remains as
an independent actor in global politics. The premise for its establishment was the
restructuring of the world devastated after the Second World War. The term “United
Nations” was coined by former U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942 (United Nation,
2011). Its operations began on October 24, 1945. It started with 50 representatives from
different countries. Generally, it functions in four areas: military issues, economic issues,
environmental issues, and human protection. It is made up of close of 200 countries from
around the world, 193 member states to be exact, with the Republic of South Sudan as its
latest member (United Nations, 2011). The UN, with its headquarters in New York City, was
designed to be a place where countries could come to discuss their issues without resorting
to violence and war, which had plagued our planet for several years in the past. Maintaining
peace and building friendships is the number one goal of the UN, as well as providing a
forum where countries could gather to discuss global issues. The General Assembly is the
gathering of all these countries. It is held in an auditorium where speeches are given.
Representatives from different member states can vote on issues.

Maintaining international peace and security became the central mission of the UN after
the war. Up to this day, the UN is the major force in governing interstate relations (Ritzer,
2015). According to the UN (2011), peace and security are maintained “by working to
prevent conflict; helping parties in conflict make peace; peacekeeping; and creating the
conditions to allow peace to hold and flourish.” The UN also has what is known as the
Security Council. This group of countries decides what to do when two or more countries
are waging war or are on the verge of fighting. There are five permanent members of the
UN Security Council- the United States, Britain, Russia, China, and France. In addition to the
five members, 10 additional countries join the permanent members for two-year terms,
making a total of 15 countries. The Security Council tries to be the arbiter in ceasefires
between two sides. They can pass sanctions like block trade with another country as a
punishment. They can send troops or observers and, if worst comes to worst, they can use
military force. In the past, UN peacekeepers have been sent to Africa, Asia, and the Middle
East. The “big five” permanent members have a veto power, which means that one member
can stop the entire council from taking action against a country. This has come up recently
during the Syrian Civil War in which Russia and China, who are allies with Syrian leader
Bashar Al-Assad, have been able to stop the other members from stepping in to deal with
the Syrian leader who was accused of using biological weapons against his own people.

The main deliberative body, the General Assembly, provides a forum for member states
to express their views and reach a consensus. In 1991, the UN’s military role was put into
question during its intervention in Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait wherein the Security Council
authorized the use of force (Ritzer, 2015). Aside from this, the UN intervened in the civil
wars of less developed countries, such as Cambodia and East Timor, through “ election and
human rights monitoring, disarmament, and even the assumption of state functions” (Weiss
and Zach, 2007, p. 1219).
 The UN is not all about fights. It has a program called UNICEF or the United Nations
Children’s Emergency Fund. Its primary goal is to help children around the world. They
collect funds to distribute emergency relief from famine and poverty and disease. It also
provides education programs in areas where there are no schools. While UNICEF is part of
the United Nations, they operate semi-independently and rely on fundraising.

In terms of economic issues, the main focus of the UN is the reduction of global
inequality. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) cover a range of concerns for the
improvement of all aspects of life. According to the UN (2017), sustainable development
encompasses economic prosperity, social well-being, and environmental protection. Since
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) did not end poverty for all people, the UN’s
post-2-15 sustainable development agenda showcases the vision of the organization when
it comes to broader issues such as climate change, disaster risk reduction, and gender
equality.

Environmental issues, such as pollution and hazardous wastes, are addressed through
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The increasing rate of greenhouse gas
emissions, rising sea level, and occurrence of extreme weather patterns are the effects of
climate change. As a response, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
took efforts that can mitigate climate change like assessment of climate science, facilitation
of climate agreements, and giving assistance to countries to reduce emissions (UN, 2011).

The UN also has the International Court of Justice (ICJ), usually referred to as the World
Court. It is located in the Netherlands in a town called The Hague. This is where countries
can settle disputes in a court of law, as well as a place where war criminals and rulers who
have done terrible things to their people can be put to trial for their crimes. Aside from this,
there are also a variety of International courts and tribunals created by the UN such as the
International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
(ITLOS). The problem is, sometimes, getting the violators all the way to Europe to face trial
because there is no actual police force to go out and get them. As more and more countries
interact with one another, people are looking for the ICJ to play a bigger role in the future of
our global world.

Finally, the UN promotes and protects human rights through different organizations and
mechanisms. Since 1948, human rights have been brought into the realm of international
law. This is reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. A variety of UN-
sponsored human rights treaties and agreements have been done for human protection.
Other mechanisms include the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR), the Human Rights Council, human rights treaty bodies, the UN Development
Group’s Human Rights Mainstreaming Mechanism (UNDG-HRM), and the Special Advisers
on the Prevention of Genocide and the Responsibility to Protect (UN,2011). There are also
legal instruments that help the organization like the International Bill of Human Rights
which consists of three legal documents: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948),
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on
Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. The UN also believes in democracy and that it is
interdependent with development and respect for all human rights.

The UN is being criticized as being weak and is unable to stop wars. Because of this, the
next institution that we are going to discuss continues to play a big role in foreign conflicts.
This is NATO. It is a defensive treaty or a military alliance between the United States,
Canada, and 25 European countries. This treaty and international organization is based on
the idea of collective security. The countries in this organization basically agreed to combine
their militaries and announce to the world that if a country messes with one of its members,
the other countries will come to their defense. NATO was created after the Second World
War, mostly during the beginning of the Cold War. With the collapse of the Soviet Union in
the early 1990s, former Soviet states, like Poland and Croatia, had joined NATO, making the
present-day Russia feel more threatened. NATO has sent troops and undertaken military
operations in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Iraq, and Africa. The United States with, by far, the most
advanced military in the world makes up the bulk of NATO forces and operations. Many of
these wars or conflicts are considered to be strictly U.S. wars.

NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs)

Another example of an international organization that was developed out of war is the
Red Cross (red Crescent in Muslim countries). It is considered as a non-governmental
organization (NGO). NGOs are not tied to any country. This allows them to operate freely
throughout the world. They provide emergency relief such as food, water, and medical
supplies for those whose homes or towns have been destroyed by disaster or war. They also
monitor the treatment of prisoner of wars and go to conflicts to make sure that no war
crimes are taking place. In fact, the Red Cross began as an organization to help those who
were wounded during wars. The big Red Cross worn by NGOs is the identification that they
are not soldiers. Part of why it is important for the Red Cross to be an NGO is that they
remain neutral and would help the wounded from both sides of war. Since they are neutral,
governments are more likely to let them come into their countries to help. While the
headquarters of the International Red Cross is in Geneva, Switzerland, they have branches
all around the world.

In addition to the Red Cross, there are many NGOs dedicated to helping people around
the world. Doctors without borders provides free emergency healthcare in disaster areas;
Oxfam fights famine and disease; Amnesty International speaks out for human rights and
political prisoners; and Save the Children helps kids get health care and education.

GLOBAL ECONOMIC ASSOCIATIONS: THE WTO AND NAFTA

The next group is an economic association-WTO. It is made up of 162 countries around

the world and was created with the goal of increasing free trade. Countries, therefore, can
buy and sell goods from one another without placing taxes on imports or tariffs. In addition,
tariffs are used to protect businesses and companies inside their country. Though good in
nature, WTO is not without criticism. In fact, a protest in Seattle at a 1999 WTO Conference
led to a major riot as some said that WTO was more about helping large companies and
corporations that it was about helping people.

Another famous economic organization is NAFTA. This is an economic treaty between

the United States, Canada, and Mexico in which the three countries trade freely without
taxing each other. NAFTA is not without critics either. Some American autoworkers
protested against NAFTA as several car companies moved their factories to Mexico in
search for cheaper labor. NAFTA, like WTO, represents the challenge in America of keeping
manufacturing factories.

GLOBALIZATION AND GLOBALISM

You probably think about links, connections, and interrelatedness of things, people, and
countries when you encounter the word “globalization.” However when compared to the
term “globalism”, globalization would be better described as the “increase or decline in the
degree of globalism” (Nye,2002, p.1). What then is globalism? Globalism refers to the
network of connections that transcends distances of different countries in the world. In
other words, the links among countries and people are better associated with globalism
while the speed in which they become linked with one another is globalization.

If we are to make a start contrast between globalism and globalization by saying that
globalization means connectedness while globalism is not, it will lead to confusion that the
present is the only time in which people got connected while in the past they were not. But
even before the Industrial Revolution, the world was already connected. Through the
conquest of different empires, such as those of the Romans, many parts of the world
became under one rule. Today, however, the contemporary world is characterized by being
connected through the internet, modern transportation, and advanced communication
technologies. This is to say, therefore, that societies in the world have always been
connected; what makes the contemporary world different from the past is the type and
speed of connection that people and societies experience.

We can also differentiate globalism and globalization in terms of its “thickness” (Nye,
2002). Globalism is thin. As it becomes thicker, globalization happens. This means that being
able to connect countries in the world through a more dynamic and faster way is
globalization. Let us take global trade as an example. In the past, the Silk Road served as the
trade routes among countries in Europe and in Asia. Aside from the trade of silk between
the continents, other products, even illegal ones, were exchanged among trader and
consumers. In addition, cultural interactions among people were made through their trades.
However, they were felt by a relatively small group of people, most especially those who
were actually on the road and did the trades. The connections were not intense nor “thick.”
In contrast to the contemporary world, “globalism becomes increasingly thick”
(Nye,2002,p.1).

This is where globalization comes in. If we look at the global trade today, it has reached
a greater number of people around the world. For example, the selling products are not
solely done through physical transactions but can be done online as well. This allows one,
who has access to computers and the World Wide Web, to be connected with millions of
people around the world. Aside from the number of people, the speed was also affected by
the transition from thin globalism to thick globalization. In the past, if you were a European
trader taking the Silk Road going to China, it would take you days or weeks to sell your
products. But today, it would only take a few seconds or minutes to sell, buy and exchange
products and services with other people even if they are a thousand miles away from you. A
concrete example of this is the change in the price of oil which can happen overnight
depending on its price in the world market.

Although globalism and globalization are often understood in terms of the economy,
Nye (2002) gave “four distinct dimensions of globalism: economic, military, environmental,
and social” (p.2). like economic globalism, the three other dimensions also become thicker
and faster as globalization intensifies. The enormous speed of potential conflict and threat
of nuclear war is an example of military globalism. In terms of environmental globalism,
global warming continues to accelerate. The last dimensions, social and cultural globalism,
“involves movements of ideas, information, images, and of people who carry ideas and
information with them (Nye, 2002, p.2). For instance, religious ideas have spread
throughout the world at greater scope and speed. Religious teachings are delivered today
though the mass media, such as televisions, radio, and the internet. Unlike before, religious
leaders had to walk by foot and had to deliver their messages in a face-to-face manner.
 With the advent of modern mass communication, computers, and social networking
sites, it seems that the connections made through the exchange of information created a
new kind of network in this contemporary world. It is at this point that the concept of
informationalism will be helpful for us to discuss.

INFORMATIONALISM

Globalism is tied to the notion of networks. For Castells(2000), “networks constitute the
fundamental pattern of life, of all kinds of life” (p. 3). It was previously mentioned that in
the present and even in the past, the world is connected. The difference between globalism
and globalization is the speed and thickness or intensity of connections. Nevertheless,
people are connected with one another whether as a small community or as a large
country.

The question now is about the type of connection that exists and begins to increase in
the contemporary world. The answer lies on the growth of information as the binding force
among people, things, and places around the globe. This technological paradigm, associated
with computer science and modern telecommunication, that replaces industrialism is called
informationalism (Castells, 2004). These are technology, the media and the internet. This is
not to say that we do not need to produce material goods such as factories, clothes, and
food; rather, exchanging information and knowledge, which is clearly immaterial goods,
becomes central in the contemporary world (Hardt & Negri,2000). This is due to the “three
of the most cutting-edge aspects of the social world in general and globalization in
particular” (Ritzer, 2015, p. 134), technology, media, and the internet.

The creation of the world’s first container ship in 1956 and the expansion of airfreight
greatly hastened the transport of goods all around the world. But a notable example of
technological advancement is the founding of Federal Express (FedEx) in the 1970s. It makes
use of computer technology in its deliveries. Computer technology is used to check our
health through the invention of magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs), ultrasound, and CT or
CAT scans. Space-based technologies were also made possible through the use of
computers (Ritzer, 2015). The launching of satellites for military surveillance, the use of
global positioning systems (GPS), and the operation of global navigation systems (GNS) are
some remarkable examples.

McLuhan and Fiore (2005) argued that in the New Media Age, the importance lies in the
medium, the way in which the message is transmitted, not necessarily in the content
presented through the medium. This means that televisions, radios, and newspapers have
been shaping “individual subjectivity and culture, not only locally but globally” (Ritzer,
2015,p,143). In addition, the French social theorist Guy DeBord (1994) emphasized in his
idea of media spectacle the sophistication and ubiquity of spectacular visual in televisions.
This made TV news a form of entertainment. Although content matters in television
broadcasts, visual spectacle or significance is an important element and perhaps the
primary key to catch the attention of the audience.

When one mentions online social networking, spam, and computer viruses, it is the
internet that binds them all. The internet is a mark of the contemporary world. According to
Ritzer (2015), “The internet has prompted a flat world thesis; anyone can be involved in it,
at least theoretically” (p. 150). Having a computer today in our homes, our schools, our
workplaces, and accessing the internet through our personal cellphones allow us to be
connected with the rest of the world. We can gain information by accessing different
websites, such as Facebook and Wikipedia, through the internet. In the same manner, the
information about ourselves that we share is also exposed. In order to control Internet
access and use, there are mechanisms such as personal passwords or in the case of Chinese
government, the “Great Firewall.”

While globalization allowed the expansion of information, access to modern

technologies is not a universal matter that is available to every person around the world.
The internet and other technologies are limited by certain barriers. These barriers include
lack of electricity, illiteracy, weak financial systems, and government regulations.

PROCESS QUESTIONS

1. Compare and contrast globalism and informationalism.

2. What are the barriers to our collective learning in the age of information?
3. Will geopolitical boundaries and physical barriers still be relevant in the future given the
nature of information and information revolution?

Activity: Collecting Posts, Connecting the World

We live in a world where we are surrounded by vast amount of information. It is all

around us. We can get information from books, television, newspapers, and online
websites. The World Wide Web has made us familiar with digital technology and allows us
to communicate with other people around the world.

Moreover, our collective learning could also be aided by modern technology. Social
media is one of the ways in which information is exchanged today. In this activity, we will
realize how connected we are in terms of the posts that we see in the Web. Although we do
not have a face to face interaction, we could somehow relate with others in this virtual
space-the internet- which largely shaped the flow of information in the contemporary
world.

1. Using your social media account (e.g., Facebook or Twitter accounts), browse your
home page and observe the posts of your friends.
2. Choose and list down at least 30 randomly selected posts. The names of your friends
can be excluded.
3. Group the posts according to theme. Some of the themes may be about a product, an
educational post, a movie, an opinion, a religious verse, or a status about one’s personal
life. Feel free to construct your own title for the posts that you are going to group
together.
4. Share the themes you have created with a classmate and answer the following
questions:
a. Which theme has the most number of posts?
b. Which post has the most number of shares?
c. What are the common themes that you and your classmate have identified?
d. Have you posted anything in the past that is similar with the posts you listed down?
THE RELEVANCE OF THE STATE AMID GLOBALIZATION

The state is a distinctive political community with its own set of rules and practices and
that is more or less separate from other communities. It has four elements: people,
territory, government, and sovereignty. The first element of a state is a permanent
population. This population does not refer to a nomadic people that move from one place
to another in an indefinite time. This permanent presence in one location is strengthened
by the second element of a state, a defined territory. A territory has clear boundaries. A
territory is effectively controlled by the third element, government. The government
regulated relations among its own people and with other states. This means that the state is
a formally constituted sovereign political structure encompassing people, territory, and its
institutions on the one hand, and maintaining its autonomy from other states on the other
hand.

It is important to differentiate the idea of nation from state. Nation refers to a people
rather than any kind of formal territorial boundaries or institutions. It is a collective identity
grounded on a notion of share history and culture. If we talk about the Philippines as a
state, we may refer to the Philippine government, the Philippine territory, and its internal
and external sovereignty. If we talk about the Philippines as a nation, we refer to our shared
collective notion of democracy, our history, and our collective identity. In other words, the
state is a political concept, while a nation is a cultural concept. States, through its
formalized institutions, more or less reflect nations. This would allow states to have a
certain people with their own collective identity. In turn, they should be allowed to form
their own political state. This is the principle of national self-determination.

This brings us to the concept of the nation-state. It is a territorially bounded sovereign

institution that governs individuals sharing a collective history, identity, and culture. In
reality, it is difficult to think of any nation as having any share national identity. The
Philippines, although formally a state, has a variety of ethnic traditions.

A variety of arguments are made including that nation-states continue to be the major
players on the global stage (Gilpin, 2001), that they “retain at least some power in the face
of globalization” (Conley, 2002, pp. 378-399), that they vary greatly in “their efficacy in the
face of globalization” (Mann, 2007, p.472), and that the rumors of the demise of the nation-
state are greatly exaggerated.

Beland (2008) argued that “ the role of the state is enduring--- and even increasing--- in
advanced industrial societies” (p.48). He saw greater demands being placed on the state
because of four major sources of collective insecurity: terrorism; economic globalization,
leading to problems such as outsourcing and pressures toward downsizing, as well as the
current economic crisis; threats to national identity due to immigration; and the spread of
global diseases such as AIDs. Further, the state does not only respond to these threats, but
may also exaggerate or create dangers, thereby making its citizens more insecure
*(Glassner, 2000). A good example is the U.S. and British governments’ arguments prior to
the 2003 war with Iraq that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) that
posed a direct threat to the United States and United Kingdom. The United Stated even
claimed that Iraq could kill millions by using offshore ships to lob canisters containing lethal
chemical or biological material into American cities (Isikoff and Corn, 2006). The collective
insecurity created by such outrageous claims helped foster public opinion in favor of
invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussein.

The other side of this argument in support of the nation-state is that global processed of
various kinds are not as powerful as many believe. For example, global business pales in
comparison to business within many countries. In addition, some question the porosity of
the nation-state by pointing, for example, to the fact that migration to other countries has
declined substantially since its heights in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries
(Gilpin, 2001).

A related point is that it would be a mistake simply “to see globalization as a threat to, a
constraint on, the nation-state; it can also be an opportunity for the nation-state” (Conley,
2002, pp. 378-399). For example, the demands of globalization were used as bases to make
the needed changes in Australian society, specifically allowing it to move away from
protectionism and in the direction of neoliberalization, to transform state enterprises into
private enterprises, and to streamline social welfare. With this, the rhetoric of globalization,
especially an exaggeration of it and its effects, was useful to those politicians who were
hopeful of such changes.
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP

Citizenship is associated with rights and obligations, for instance, the right to vote and
the obligation to pay taxes. Both rights and obligations link the individual to the state. It also
has to do with our attitudes. We need to be willing to engage and to spend time and effort to
the community of which we feel part of. Community has traditionally been regarded as
something very local. How, then, can the idea of citizenship be transferred to the global level?

Caecilia Johanna van Peski (as cited in Baraldi, 2012) defined global citizenship “as a
moral and ethical disposition that can guide the understanding of individuals or groups of local
and global contexts, and remind them of their relative responsibilities within various
communities.” Global citizens are the glue which binds local communities together in an
increasingly globalized world. In van Peski’s words, “global citizens might be a new type of
people that can travel within these various boundaries and somehow still make sense of the
world” (Baraldi, 2012).

Global citizenship does not automatically entail a single attitude and a particular value
with globalization. We must remember that globalization is not a single phenomenon; rather,
there are many obligations. While some need to be resisted, others are welcomed and should
be encouraged. They are bound to be multiple futures for multiple globalizations. These
globalizations created enemies because according to one broad view, globalization failed to
deliver its promises (Cohen, 2006). The so-called bottom billion lacks infrastructures and has
been disenfranchised. The opponents of globalization blame either Westernization or global
capitalism. Thus, the enemies resist globalization, especially when it comes to global economy
and global governance.

There are three approaches to global economic resistance. Trade protectionism involves
the systematic government intervention in foreign trade through tariffs and non-tariff barriers
in order to encourage domestic producers and deter their foreign competitors (McAleese,
2007). Although there exists a widespread consensus regarding its inefficiency, trade
protectionism is still popular since it shields the domestic economy from systematic shocks. Fair
trade is a different approach to economic globalization, which emerged as a counter to
neoliberal “free trade” principles (Nicholls and Opal, 2005). Fair trade aims at a more moral and
equitable global economic system in which, for instance, price is not set by the market; instead,
it is negotiated transparently by both producers and consumers. While it is popular among
consumers in the North, it has met only limited acceptance among producers (Ritzer, 2015). Its
ability to supply a mass market and its applicability to manufacture products are also doubted.
The third form of resistance to economic globalization related to helping the bottom billion
based on Collier (2007). Increasing aid is only one of the many measures that are required.
International norms and standards can be adapted to the needs of the bottom billion. The
reduction of trade barriers would also reduce the economic marginalization of these people
and their nations.

When it comes to dealing with political globalization, increased accountability (Germain,

2004) and transparency are the key issues. All political organizations, at different levels, should
be more accountable for their actions because they are now surrounded by an “ocean of
opacity” (Holzner and Holzner, 2006, p.336). Increased transparency has been aided by various
mechanism such as transnational justice systems, international tribunals, civil society, and
particularly the Transparency International.

Like globalization, resistance to globalization is multiple, complex, contradictory, and

ambiguous. This movement also has the potential to emerge as the new public sphere, which
may uphold progressive values such as autonomy, democracy, peace, ecological sustainability,
and social justice. These forces of resistance are themselves products of globalization and can
be seen as globalization from below (Smith, 2008). According to della Porta et al. (2006), the
impetus for such a movement comes from individuals, groups, and organizations which are
oppressed (i.e., self-perception) by globalization from above (neoliberal economic systems or
aggressively expanding nations and corporations). They seek a more democratic process of
globalization. However, globalization from below also involves less visible, more right-wing
elements, such as the America First Party and Taliban.

The World Social Forum (WSF) is centered on addressing the lack of democracy in
economic and political affairs (Fisher and Ponniah, 2003). However, the diversity of elements
involved in WSF hinders the development of concrete political proposals. A significant influence
on WSF has been that of cyberactivism, which is based on the “cultural logic of networking”
(Juris,2005) and virtual movements,” such as Global Huaren. This cyberpublic was formed as a
protest against the violence, discrimination, and hatred experienced by Chinese residents in
Indonesia after the 1997 Asian financial crisis. In 1998, worldwide rallies condemning the
violence were made possible through the Global Huaren which according to Ritzer (2015)
“became an interesting global watchdog for Chinese interests” (p. 307).

Since there is no single globalization, the future is also multi-dimensional. Some foresee
the continuing expansion of globalization both in general as well as in more specific
globalization. Others have a far more pessimistic vision of “Mad Max” scenarios that could end
the current era of globalization (Turner, 2007).

In any case, given that there is no world government, the idea of global citizenship
demands the creation of rights and obligations. Moreover, fulfilling the promises of
globalization and the solution to the problems of the contemporary world does not lie on single
entity or individual, but on citizens, the community, and the different organizations in societies.
The dynamic of globalization demands the efforts of the whole array of inter-governmental
organizations such as the United Nations and the World Bank; International NGOs like
Greenpeace and Amnesty International; and the citizen initiatives and community action groups
that reach above the nation-state level like the World Social Forum and Occupy Movement.
Ultimately, reforms in global governance are required to allow world citizens to take more part
directly in all aspects of human life at the global level.