Approaches of contemporary globalization

The term globalization is multi dimensional, and therefore it can be complex in its definition. It is a method where all political, economic, cultural and social activities start operating at a international level. In recent years there has been a unexpected growth in global connections with the people and communities around the world. The distance between different communities, cultures and countries has become less of a physical distance and can now communicate using new technology. Although the claim that contemporary globalization has made the nation state obsolete depends on which view you look at, as there are 3 different approaches to globalization.

This globalization also depends on how you are looking at it from a cultural , economic,political or social point of view. In the UK today we are living in a very diverse society with a lot of different cultural backgrounds. With the use of the internet we are able to communicate around the world , and even the way we dress is starting to look similar to cultures from around the world and we are inspired by their style. This technology is a stepping stone for businesses to become bigger and expand world wide. A nation state is an independent country which has a large amount of people that share the same language, traditions and history but the nations state are being affected by globalization.

There are 3 approaches to globalization, internationalist, transformationalist and globalist. The globalist view could be viewed in the eye of a pessimistic globalist or the optimistic or positive globalist. The optimistic view is that globalization is exciting and creating a more diverse society, but still recognise the dangers of global environmental pollution, positive globalizers argue that we could improve the position if we all took some responsibility for reducing unsustainable levels of consumption, and they point to the development of new technologies which are likely to reduce levels of pollution. ( p22, Held 2004).

Globalists see that globalization is disappearing as there is less control of the nation states than in the past. Globalization is an inevitable trajectory of development , so any attempts to resist it are doomed to failure. (p22 Held 2004).

Internationalists views argue that globalization is a myth. They believe that most economic and social activity is regional rather that global. Transformanationalists views argue that the nation state still remains powerful they also see the problems can be reversed by restructuring and accommodate the new forms of global governance. Looking at the views, the transformanationlaist on globalization making nation state obsolete seems to be the most plausible from any finding at this stage as it seems that the government can adjust there roles instead of losing power altogether.

Nation states are seen as blocks of territory with fixed borders, it is argued that these boundaries are not as important as they used to be due to globalization.

There has been an increase in the co-operation and mutual understanding between countries as politicians try to elude national boundaries, or which on based in other countries. There has been a dramatic increase in the number of intergovernmental organisations IGOs around the globe from 37 in 1909 to nearly 300 in 1999. Globalists would have us believe that the governments are fragmenting it is more likely the governments are learning to accommodate a more complex international co-ordination than has been in the past.

The main problem with this increase in intergovernmental association’s is that the foreign office find it more difficult to control the increased amount of intergovernmental operation. Looking at how these organizations set up it is obvious that the representatives for each country are actually representing the nation state they come from. Globalization encourages the growth of communication and organisations that link human kind across the globe. Because the communication link and interaction people are not constrained by their national boundaries , this does not mean that a nation state loses its sovereignty. UK government does not always agree completely in its decisions, However the people of the UK still seem to stay confident in their nation state as this is what we identify ourselves with. The nation state that we identify with most is the UK and is very important because there has been such change over the authorities. Governments might have found themselves subject to actions from other organisations that would of not happened in the past, as back then we would have only cared for our own need without any outside interference. For example the UK government might have been under some sort of control of the EU and the World Trade Organisations. This would have been said to create a more uncertain society in terms of the nation state identity by tranformationalist. According to inter-nationalist there are a few general multi-national corporations than thought they are more accurately described as ‘transnational’ corporations (TNCs) which are not governed from any national base, and which have a more genuinely international organisation personnels. (Thompson, 2000 p103). The percentage of a countries trade is global and often thought as being greater than it actually is.

Globalists view MNCs are taxing over from government power, however this is flawed as it is still the government who has the power to enforce laws and legislation.

Transformationalist would argue that there is a new global politics appearing, this does not mean that all government have an equal say in global decision making. The poorest people in the world still have a little say in what goes on. In the UK our nation state is still very important. The government might have to adjust to consider other countries but a majority of these countries are within the EU more than around the world, it looks like the UK government is becoming more regionalised than globalized. USA and the EU and Japan may work together and some other countries ignored, mainly the poorer ones.

This is quite true as most powerful economies have more political power than the poor countries that have little power.

The UK government may have had to change its roles on a local level more than global level, but the claim that globalization has made the nation state obsolete, its more likely that it is being reshaped within the EU but nothing says if this is really happening at a global level. As we can see in my conclusion is that globalization is changing,and how fast and to what extent that this is happening might be a slightly exaggerated. This does not mean the end of the nation state, it just means that it is being redefined. Globalization in one way or another is creating a more uncertain, yet diverse world. Each of the points have there flaws and their valid areas to each of their arguments, the transformationalists view of the government having to adjust the way it is run is a very valid point. Each argument could be seen valid depending on how its seen and what you believe in, but every individual will have there own opinion on each outcome.

REFERENCES

• Kelly, B. and Prokhovnik, R. (2004) ‘Economic globalization?’ in Held, D. (ed) A Globalizing World? Culture, Economics, Politics, London, Routledge/The Open University.