Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Define globalization.
- Discuss the differences between economic, political, and cultural globalization.
- Reflect on how globalization affects individuals and influences government policy.
Introduction
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 permitted long-developing global trends and processes to become leading voices. Some claimed that democracy defeated authoritarianism; others claimed that capitalism defeated communism; still others asserted that the West, led by the United States, triumphed. Fukuyama, two years prior to the Soviet Union's collapse (in 1989), wrote that the end of the Cold War would mean that there would be no serious competition left. The implication of such strong statements was that liberalism would follow worldwide, ushering in an era focused on free market, capitalist economic activity; democratic political systems; and the protection of human rights.
While these statements were overzealous in their claims about the defeat of authoritarianism and communism worldwide, they point to economic, political, and cultural trends at the global level that we collectively refer to as "globalization." Globalization describes increased interconnectedness and interdependence among states, economies, and cultures.
The term became popular in the 1990s. In his bestseller, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Friedman (1999) describes globalization as an "overarching international system shaping the domestic politics and foreign relations of virtually every country." He claims that the driving force behind globalization is free-market capitalism, where economic deregulation, market competition, and privatization are the global norms. Over time, he predicts that these trends and processes will have a homogenizing effect, pushing for a new global society based on capitalism, democracy, and liberalism.
Steger (2020) argues that globalization is more than just the advent of economic capitalism or of Western values replacing local traditions. Globalization is the "thickening of the global-local nexus" (what he refers to as "glocalization"), and it refers to a process. As Steger relates, "globalization refers to expansion and intensification of social relations and consciousness across world-time and world-space." More simply, "globalization is about growing worldwide interconnectivity."
This increase in interconnectivity is not a new phenomenon. We see increasing interconnectivity historically with ancient trade routes on land and sea, with empire-making and colonization, and with the advent of international economic institutions (e.g., the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund) after the end of World War II (Ritzer and Dean, 2015). Regardless of when an individual believes globalization began, there is no doubt that the process of growing worldwide interconnectivity has had an impact on citizens across all states.
From an academic standpoint, interests surrounding globalization include topics as varied as ecological worries over global supply chains; philosophical considerations of globalization's homogenizing effects; economic impacts of globalization on the leisure industry and over-tourism; spiritual effects when globalization impacts religious practices, such as pilgrimages; and the rapid spread of technological advancements worldwide. In what follows, we will focus on only three aspects of globalization: economic, political, and cultural.
Economic Globalization
As discussed above, one driving force in contemporary globalization is a push toward free-market capitalism, often referred to as "neoliberal" policies. Neoliberalism is an approach that favors free-market capitalism, deregulation, and a reduction of government intervention in the economy. This approach takes the classical liberal arguments in favor of private property, legal enforcement of contracts, and the "invisible hand" of the market (see Chapter 8), and pushes policy proposals like "deregulation (of the economy), liberalization (of trade and industry), and privatization (of state-owned enterprises)" through leading international institutions (Steger, 2021). International institutions are bodies of authority above the state that codify, maintain, and sometimes enforce sets of rules that govern state behavior.
These international economic institutions stem from a conference held in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire in 1944 that aimed to arrange and manage international economic relations after World War II, creating the Bretton Woods System. Bretton Woods led to the creation of (1) the World Bank, an international institution that provides loans and financial assistance to developing states; (2) the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which manages the global monetary system and provides loans to states that experience currency crises; and (3) the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which eventually became the World Trade Organization (WTO, formally established in 1995), which supervises trade agreements between states with the aim of promoting free trade. The collective efforts of these international economic institutions in promoting neoliberalism is referred to as "the Washington Consensus" (the World Bank and the IMF have headquarters in Washington, D.C.).
Scholars, policymakers, and politicians in favor of the Washington Consensus argue that a deregulation, liberalization, and privatization approach will lead to free trade between states and an increase in foreign direct investment (FDI). Free trade is unregulated trade of goods and services between states, usually through the reduction of import and export controls. Foreign direct investment (FDI) is domestic investment by a foreign company in the form of exports, the building of a production plant in the host country, an acquisition of a domestic company, or a joint venture.
The idea is that FDI will spur the creation of jobs within a state, leading to increased employment, and the advent of more wealth. Workers will benefit, and higher paying jobs will lead to more consumer spending, encouraging entrepreneurship. The importation of cheaper goods and services will help to lower the cost of living, and these changes will create the conditions for the development of a middle class. If all states were to adopt a neoliberal approach, then the triumph of free-market, capitalist liberal democracies would be complete.
Steger (2020) refers to this discourse as "market globalism," in which a "self-regulating market…serves as the framework for a future global order." For market globalists, capitalism is the end-game; a future in which integrated markets create a global society is one where everyone benefits. This is an optimistic view of economic globalization where people are allowed to participate in a global marketplace of ideas, goods, products, and services. In reality, while economic globalization has led to dramatic global economic growth, a reduction in poverty, and the creation of a sizable middle class, growth in wealth across states remains vastly uneven.
Political Globalization
Political globalization, increased political interconnectedness and interdependence among states, again stems largely from state participation in international institutions, such as the United Nations (UN) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Some argue that the rise in the importance of international institutions eroded state sovereignty, but few (if any) believe that states are on a path to submitting to a world government. Rather, due to political globalization, states engage in global governance, the collective effort of the world's states to find lasting solutions to global problems through international institutions. This is sometimes attempted through institutions like the United Nations (UN) and the World Health Organization (WHO).
International institutions are not the only actors crowding the notion of state supremacy. As discussed in Chapter 11, non-state actors can act in a similar manner. These actors may include individuals with the ability to exert significant political influence (e.g., Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Motors and SpaceX, and Greta Thunburg, a young Swedish climate activist), multinational corporations (e.g, McDonalds and Starbucks), transnational criminal or terrorist organizations, armed resistance groups, and decentralized networks of like-minded individuals who engage in collective action.
Other prolific non-state actors are non-governmental organizations. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are private, voluntary organizations that unite, usually for action on specific issues. NGOs lie outside the traditional structure of international politics, but many have a significant impact on world affairs. NGOs derive their power from a variety of sources, most notably moral authority, where members believe that their cause is righteous. This includes many environmental NGOS, such as Greenpeace, that use the media and the strength of their individual activists to promote their cause.
Finally, the discourse of political globalization often focuses on the process of democratization. Neoliberalism assumes not only a convergence in terms of economic governance across states, but also political convergence. That is, the spread of democratic norms were to accompany the diffusion of capitalism. In theory, the increase in the size of a state's middle class stemming from neoliberal policies would ultimately lead to demands for political representation from these citizens. In reality, we have not seen a clear convergence on democratic regimes (for a review of non-democratic regimes and democratic backsliding, return to Chapter 5). Instead, in some states (e.g., Russia and China), we see the emergence of "bureaucratic authoritarianism." Bureaucratic authoritarianism is the management of a state through a strong bureaucratic organization that excludes the popular will of the people, and where decisions are made by technocrats, or subject matter experts.
Cultural Globalization
Cultural globalization stems from the flow of people over the last few decades and the ever-growing flow of information from new technologies. In theory, some scholars argue that the peoples of the world will eventually coalesce into one global civil society, or what Steger (2020) calls the "global imaginary." The global imaginary refers to people's growing consciousness of global connectivity, where people think of themselves as global citizens first. Yet, thus far, we have not seen such a shared consciousness.
The end of the Cold War led to growth in migration, people moving from one place to another. These movements, usually between states, occur both intentionally and unintentionally. Intentional migration is when a person chooses to move from one place to another, and this includes both immigrants and sojourners. Immigrants are migrants who willingly and legally leave their home states to work and live in another state, often possessing needed skill sets or investment capital. Sojourners are migrants who temporarily live in a place and return to their home state (e.g., international students and temporary laborers).
Unintentional, or irregular, migration is when a person does not choose to move from one place to another. Unintentional migrants include refugees, asylum-seekers, and internationally-displaced people (IDPs). A refugee is a migrant who is outside their home state of nationality or habitual residence who has a well-founded fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, or membership of a particular social group. A temporary asylee is a migrant who intends to stay in a new place for a brief time, but subsequently cannot return home. Internally displaced people (IDPs) are migrants who remain within the borders of their home state, but have fled their homes due to safety concerns.
Cultural globalization stemming from the flow of people can result in new identities in diverse contexts. For example, migration can have a nativist effect on the receiving state. Too much migration often leads to a rise in anti-immigrant sentiment among the public, which is sometimes accompanied by xenophobia and discriminatory action.
Beyond the flow of people, cultural globalization stems from increasing flows of information, particularly through the internet and the rise in social media. Access to websites, document repositories, blogs, discussion communities, and instant news vastly expands individuals' abilities to garner greater social information. The internet, and particularly social media, acts as a sociopolitical venue to share information, democratizing access and allowing all to act as public intellectuals.
In the so-called Arab Spring, for example, youth movements organized through Internet webpages and social media. In Egypt, prior to former President Hosni Mubarak's downfall, activists, organizers, and supporters used Facebook and Twitter instrumentally to gather support in the lead up to the "Day of Revolt" in Cairo's central Tahrir Square (January 25, 2011). As al-Jazeera reported, "the week before Hosni Mubarak's resignation, the total rate of tweets about Egypt surged from 2,300 a day to 230,000 around the world." In response, the Mubarak regime blocked Internet use during the protests. Protesters then used proxy computers to get around censors; they connected to users in Sweden, using dial-up modems. Once the protesters were no longer subject to Egyptian authorities, they published an "Egypt Wiki page – a 'how-to' list for activists to get online and stay connected, [and they] started using text messages to organize their marches" (al Jazeera, 2016). For those unable to get online, protesters also went analog by creating handheld signs with instructions for demonstrating. Per al Jazeera, "If you could not look down at your phone for updates, you could look up and find signs that explained where and when to gather next." In this example, the Egyptian leader's choice to cut Internet access--and hence his attempt to temporarily wipe out a key component fueling cultural globalization--led to unintended consequences. Cutting off information may have led to more citizens taking to the streets, further fueling the revolution.
