session #2 Flashcards
what are the dimensions of globalization?
- people (on the move, majority South-South (not South->North))
!move is also within continents etc. (e.g. within Africa) - capital (global trade, more and more non-rich to non-rich (first mostly rich to rich))
- politics ((most/some are) global, at least in effects)
- culture (global)
what processes are connected to globalization
- interdependence
- time-space compression
What approaches are there on globalization?
- ‘international relations’ approach
- ‘globalist’ approach
- transnational critique
‘International Relations’ approach globalization
- domestic/international divide
- states as main actors
- non-state actors negligible (in the end:
e.g. Maersheimer, realism, constructvism (adds a couple of premises)
globalist approach globalization
- world divides are flattened
- world is undifferentiated investment surface
- decreased relevance of states
popular at end of the cold war, end of bipolarity
- coming from a hope of a new type of world
interdependence
the process through which ‘‘security and force matter less and countries are connected by multiple social and political relationship’’
- Keohane and Nye
states are connected to each other (economically)
time-space compression
the set of processes that cause the relative distances between places (i.e., as measured in terms of travel time or cost) to contract, effectively making such places grow ‘‘closer’’
- David Harvey
digital lives -> connection to people who aren’t near you
distance and time seem and are smaller/shorter
transnational critique globalization
from the professor
problem of analytical purchase
- relations develop between states and non-state actors
- states adapt to globalization: transgovernmentalism
problem of conceptualization: there isn’t only states, there isn’t states don’t matter
- states matter in some cases, they don’t matter in others
What directions are there for a transnational approach
- territorial trap
- sovereignty as relational
- spatiality as networked
- identity as multiple and hybrid
territorial trap
John Agnew (aka smiley face)
territorial trap: wrong ideas about states
- states don’t have absolute power over territory (sovereignty isn’t absolute)
- sovereign space is not a surface but networks
- boundaries of the state aren’t the boundaries of society
sovereignty is not absolute
- territorial trap
- effective territorial sovereignty is a myth
- rule existed in other forms (city-state, monarchies, empires): it could be different now, or in the future
- territorial state is a recent invention
sovereignty is a myth, it’s imposed
sovereign space is not a surface but networks
- territorial trap
unified territorial control has a history
- power operates much more through networks
- they don’t follow an international/domestic distinction (don’t (always) care about boundaries)
- transnational elite networks / transgovernmentalism
states aren’t unitary actors, interested in the same things
boundaries of the state aren’t the boundaries of society
- nationalism is historically determined (violent proces: e.g. forcing a language)
- identities have never entirely fit territorial borders
- globalization has reinforced discrepancy
- hibridity rather than homogeneity (idea that diversity is positive)
globalization is
- increasing interconnection
- set of processes of deterritorialization, interdependence, and compression of time and space
