information sociology
2012047886 Dong-Joon, Yoo
1. Summarize
Globalization refers to a multi-dimensional concept transcending space and time beyond time. The political globalization in this chapter can be understood as a tension between the three stages of the complex world politics: global geopolitics, global normative culture and polycentric networks. Thus, the political globalization here aims to deal with relational dynamics rather than establishing a new concept.
The first dimension of political globalization is the geopolitics of global power. Currently, the most pervasive political globalization is based on parliamentary democracy. It takes traditional forms as well as constituting a new kind of global geopolitics. Despite the rise of the United States as a global power, the United States will not be able to establish global supremacy and will be challenged by many centres of power.
A second dimension of political globalization refers to the rise of a global normative culture. This is independent of geopolitics and is largely legal but diffused in global political communication. One of the main examples is human rights. 현재 political communication is now also global in scope, no longer confined to national borders. Associated with the global diffusion of democracy, political
communication has become the basis of a global normative culture.
The last dimension of political globalization is polycentric networks. These networks refer to multiple forms of nonterritorial politics which emanate from a multiplicity of sites and which cannot be reduced to a single centre. These processes of political globalization are associated with networks and flows, new sources of mobility and communication, and represent new relationships between the individual, state and society.
The three dynamics of political globalization will be shown around four examples of social transformation: the transformation of nationality and citizenship, the public sphere and political communication, civil society, and space and borders.
The first one is the transformation of nationality and citizenship. States continue to be powerful actors but exist in a more globally connected world that they do not fully control. According to Susan Strange, in the most well-known formulation of this position, states have been usurped by global markets. The result is that states have to share sovereignty with other global players.
The second one is the transformation of the public sphere and communication. Political globalization is most visible in terms of changes in political communication and in the wider transformation of the public sphere.
The third one is the centrality of civil society. The idea of civil society is central to understanding the relationships of political globalization. In global civil society, the civil societalization is important. The centrality of global civil society to political globalization inheres in its location at the confluence of processes leading to the construction of mechanisms of polycentric governance and the emergence of transnational movements and networks which are working to erode more territorial organizational forms.
The last one is the transformation of spaces and borders. One important consequence of this shift to spaces of flows is that mobility is increasingly seen as independent of space.
2. New, interesting or unusual items I learned
There are dilemmas to which complex relationships give rise and the implications for the tension between autonomy and fragmentation.
The first dilemma is about democracy. Democracy is both universally desired and universally distrusted; for being elitist, authoritarian, formal rather than substantive, imported and inauthentic etc. Currently, the most prevalent politics is liberal democracy, which can serve as an ideology for elites. It is inefficient to overcome economic hardship or resolve unfair distribution of wealth. Also, it can be used as an ideology that works in favor of elites or powerful people in terms of decision-making and enforcement of policies.
The second dilemma is about global normative culture. It can lead to the possibility of new communities of fate from the perceived dangers of ‘world risk society’ mentioned by Ulrich Beck.
The last dilemma is about polycentric networks. Polycentric networks create new opportunities for autonomy and the recognition of a range of new actors and new modes of governance, but, at the same time, can create new instabilities and dangers.
3. Discuss point
Modern democracy is a form of representation system. Politicians in the parliament decide on behalf of the public. The conflicting concept of representation system is direct democracy. In this direct democracy, people directly participate in politics under direct democracy and direct participation. Although the liberal system looks similar to elitism, it can be included in democracies in terms of finding the basis source for power from the public.
The strength of democracy lies in the vote. Citizens can make decisions directly based on their own interests. Thus, the act of voting can accurately reflect individual opinions.
Disadvantages can appear in the rise of dictator, which is elected by the election. Unenlightened citizens are easily sympathetic to the words of a few eloquent speakers, and the few fluent eloquence of the speaker can represent power by becoming representative of the public. Hitler is the example. Also, politics can be decided by a majority. Minority can be ignored because the decision is decided by majority.
I wonder what you think of this idea.
No comments:
Post a Comment