III. Blog - Political globalization

1. The following blog is about the article “Political Globalization” from Gerard Delanty and Chris Rumford. The both authors analyses, how the process of globalization impacts the world policy. The most important event, that drives to the current worldwide political trend, is the fall of the Iron Curtain. Before its fall in 1989 the world was divided into the capitalism western world and the planned economy countries around the Soviet Union. Since the fall democracy is the main political system worldwide. For countries it’s a key to be democratically ordered to participate in the world’s community. The political alignment towards the democracy is characterized by the global power of the United States of America. Their political orientation and decisions often have consequences for the world community. To mention and example, the intervention of the US into the Iraq war, makes its legitim to enforce global wars. Also often mentions in relation with the supremacy of the US is the conspiracy theory of the “new world system”, which is saying that the world will be ruled by one global governance. Besides this theory there is a trend towards cosmopolitanism. In general its focused on human rights and environmental issues. Especially the environmental problem is forcing countries to work together, because environmental problems as global warming don´t stop at borders.  To discuss international problems governances pay nowadays a lot more attention to geopolitics. This trend is obvious to be seen by the growing impact of polycentric networks as for example the United Nations. The trend was enhanced by the development of communications. New mobility and technologic enable lobbyism, political advertisement and new flows of information. 

  

The global public sphere as capitalism and the market are seen as artificial and man made by humans. Meanwhile anticapitalistic orientated organisations, in form of Non-governmental organisations, seen as s force for good. So in their intention to fight for good living conditions for everyone there are challenging the hegemony. The NGO´s are forming supra-territorial communities, which are rising out of civil socialization. This realm is seen as natural by humans. 

With the process of political globalisation, the reference of politics as a matter of a nation-state is decreasing. The governances losing the fully control as a sovereign actor. They are still powerful actors in global matters, to be seen by the fact that the nations-states US and China a still the most powerful actors in international context, but different impacts lower the impact of nation-states. One rising power are companies, which have grown to global player and challenging nation-state with huge impact economic matters. To ensure a stable market the nation-states become agents of capitalism and transform more and more into a functional component of the transnational apparatus. Besides the economy the organisation in polycentric networks as UN or the EU makes nation-states lose sovereignty. Especially the example of the European Union shows that the membership states accepted to conveyed sovereignty to the Union. The nation-state are still autonomy, but must implement the regulation of the Union. But not just member nation-states of the EU need to adapt their regulation. All over the world the boundaries between national and international law are lowering. As well in Europe tendencies of growing extreme right is observable. The more a governance opens towards international impact the more ultra conservative initiatives and parties get popular, in the text France was mentioned as an example. 

2. I was a bit disappointed about the text of Gerard Delanty and Chris Rumford. Just a few weeks ago I dealt with concerns of international matters. I expected that the text will explain more about how international political processes were impacted by the globalisation, with links to the cultural and economic globalisation. But the authors set their focus on the internationalisation of political processes of nation-states. A long passage is dealing with the nation-state to conclude that they are importance in international politics is decreasing, but they still have a huge impact. But what is when it comes to international networks – what are the differences in political ideologic? How the process of dealing with international problems has change by the impact of the globalisation? Are there synergies in global politics grown by the impact of globalisation? When they come to the topic of new communication systems and possibilities – why they don´t mention the fact that nation-states try to influence the political system of other nations. Or what is about the nations as the Kurds that don´t have a nation-state? How where they be treated in international contant?

For me the text left more questions unanswered and poses more even more questions that it´s able to answer. 

3. In the text the NGO’s where mention as good force converse to the nation-state institutions. In both contexts people are involve, who try to create an environment of well-being. What is your opinion? Why governmental institutions have a worse reputation that NGO’s? In which areas they might be better that NGO´s?