Is globalization a challenge or a threat to nation-states as a dominant form of polity (original) (raw)
Related papers
Rethinking Nation-State in the Era of Globalization
The Jahangirnagar University Journal of International Relations, 2015
Globalization usually refers to the idea of worldwide interconnectedness. Globalization perhaps is the most powerful force which is challenging the traditional notion of state to state interaction and reshaping it in various ways. Apart from the relations among states within the political arena, it also includes economic, social and cultural variables. Critics point out that the process of globalization threatens to undermine state sovereignty. As a result, the traditional notion of nation-state is gradually evolving in the era of globalization. It is also argued that the globalization process has long been used as a tool to dominate the developing economies by the developed countries. Globalization thus offers different opportunities to different economies. Hence, we need to analyze the impacts of globalization from multiple aspects. This article is an attempt to analyze the origin of globalization, its impacts on international relations, impact on state sovereignty using various methods of analysis.
Globalization and the Nation State
2011
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 2nd edition 2011 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission.
Nation-States in the midst of Globalization
Globalization is a very recent phenomenon in the world that affects people very closely on their personal daily basis lives and their all social organizations including states. Indeed rapid technological developments were the main factors for rising globalization, because these developments easily broke down many physical barriers to worldwide communication. However, because of its non-governmental origin, globalization accelerated humanity’s vulnerability in some aspects, either. It is argued that the paradigm of nation-state is one of the biggest suffered components of the world against globalization. This paper addresses the inevitability of globalization through the contemporary global economy and its main actor multinational companies (MNC); however, it is accepted that the nature and functions of nation-states are threatened by globalization, but for better or worse the world is still nation-state dominated and it looks early to argue the nation-states will killed by globalization. In this paper we will first have a look at the rules of contemporary global economy, for better understanding. Later on we will discuss the relation with globalization and the paradigm of nation-state.
Globalization and Nation State
International Journal for Innovation Education and Research
The article explains the impact of globalization on state sovereignty. The globalization is the dominant force which has shaped a new era of interaction and interdependence among nations. It has many dimensions such as economic, political, military, social and cultural dimension. It creates both opportunities and costs to the nation state. Sovereignty is the most essential element of the state. Globalization contributes to the change and reduction of the scope of state sovereignty. The scope of the inner sovereignty has legally narrowed to a large degree due to the international agreements including global financial flows, activities of International Organization and Multinational Corporation, Information communication technology and issues concerning human rights and in connection with already formed models and traditions of states' behavior. At the same time increasingly more states quite often give away some of their sovereign powers voluntarily for certain reason.
SECTION4 GLOBALIZATION AND THE NATION STATE As discussed
in the previous section, an essential link between globalization and the nation state is the concept of sovereignty, a term dating back several centuries, well before the nationstate system was established in 1648. Originally intended in reference to the establishment of order within a state, sovereignty has since been interpreted by some as a legal quality that places the state above the authority of all external laws. Yet, whenever a state exercises its sovereign right to sign a treaty, it is also willfully limiting that right by the very act of undertaking an international legal obligation. States are also bound by other rules, such as customary international law. With these formal legal limitations, sovereignty stubbornly persists even in an age of globalization. It is manifested in such functions as the coining of money, the gathering of taxes, the promulgation of domestic law, and the conduct of foreign policy, the regulation of commerce, and the maintenance of domestic order. These are all functions that are reserved exclusively to the state. Nonetheless, it is evident that States over the years have discovered that their interests are better protected and advanced within a broader system of binding rules than without such a system. Rules help to define rights as well as duties, including duties to do and not to do certain things. These rights and obligations depend on a whole complex of circumstances: political, economic, cultural, and technological. Presently, globalization is having a profound effect upon national and international rules i.e. influencing the norms that govern world commerce, transportation and environmental protection etc. Therefore, in western public policy circles in the mid-1980s term "interdependence " was introduced and was generally viewed in an economic context. Globalization simply referred to a largely commercial process involving rapid increase in the exchange of goods, capital and services across national frontiers. It figured particularly in writings about the role of multinational corporations with their global networks of vertically-integrated subsidiaries and affiliates. Expanded flows of commerce across borders accrued many benefits. They provided profits, jobs, efficiencies of scale, lowered unit costs and increased the variety of goods available for everyone to buy. This commerce was facilitated by important technological trends, like the increased speed and declining cost of long-distance transportation (both of passengers and of cargo) and similar developments in the field of telecommunications. In short, it was not just getting easier to do business across national borders, but highly desirable to the growing numbers of potential beneficiaries of this commerce. Some scholars believe that unfettered trade would be the key to world peace. The argument is that states and the large economic interests within them would not like to go to wars to interfere with the cool logic of mutual economic gain. Journalists, social scientists and political leaders joined their economist friends in heralding a new age of interdependence because it promised a more rational way of world's business. Many of the writers were also keenly aware Globalization and the Nations State……14 Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Business Management (ISBN: 978-969-9368-07-3) of another dimension of interdependence: its potential to make armed conflicts much more devastating. Distinguished observers like Norman Angell, Leonard Wolf, Francis Delaisi, and Ramsey Muir wrote extensively on this theme and questioned the adequacy of the nation state in meeting the economic and security challenges of the new century.
Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov. Series VII: Social Sciences • Law
The state is that form of organization specific to human society even today, although several thousand years have passed since it was set up in the Ancient Orient. Over time the concept of state has evolved, perhaps even sometimes didn't evolve, on the contrary, it has certainly undergone complex adaptations generated by the challenges that have arisen over different historical periods, as well as by historical, political, social, economic, cultural phenomena, etc. Nowadays, globalization is a phenomenon or even a complex process generated by a multitude of causes, shared, more or less, by human society, but whose existence and effects can neither be ignored nor denied. In this briefly presented context, are witnessing the encounter of two different concepts, perhaps even antagonistic, concepts, namely the state, and globalization. These two concepts and more had to find a way to live together. We ask ourselves, however, whether this coexistence between the state and globalizati...
The Contemporary Globalization and Its Impact on the Role of States
Research on humanities and social sciences, 2015
The main aim of this paper is primarily to prefigure to what extent contemporary globalization impacted on nation-states role, importance, sovereignty and autonomy. The study is based on document analysis. It shows that the contemporary phase of globalization is profoundly shaped and impacted states, forced to adjust them with the changes coming with globalization. But this doesn’t make states less significant and their role restricted. Rather they redefine their role and pursue wider policies to overcome the challenges of it. Yet unlike the Westphalia State System (1648-1945) the contemporary states sovereignty and autonomy is somewhat subject to compromise. Keywords: Globalization, globalist, skeptics, transformationalist, role states
Globalization Theory and State Theory: The False Antinomy
Studies in Political Economy, 2017
Since the 1990s, globalization theorists have published a neverending litany of books and articles about the crisis of the nationstate, the eclipse of the state, the retreat of the state, and even the end of the nation-state. Globalization theory has, on a regular basis, dismissed the nation-state as irrelevant to understanding contemporary political and economic development. However, this paper reexamines the relationship between globalization theory and state theory to argue that nation-states are the principal agents of globalization, as well as the guarantors of the political and material conditions necessary for global capital accumulation. Globalization theorists have constructed a false antinomy that rests largely on having misconstrued international relations (IR) theory, while ignoring significant developments in neo-Marxist state theory.