Globalization and global politics ANTHONY MCGREW Framing Questions © Why is globalization so contentious? ‘© What are the implications world order? © How does the study of globalizatio Reader's Guide Globalization isa concept which fers tothe widen ing, deepening, and acceleration of worldwide con- rectivity or interconnectedness. Popular metaphors portray it in vivid terms as: a shrinking ‘world, ‘net- ro vked word te death of distance, 2gobal village, or ‘global civilization’ Globalization, in ‘simultaneously of the current crisis of globalization for world politics and n advance understanding cof world politics? ore and dividing the world, is a much ™: ‘and contradictory phenomenon than these 1 This chapter will explore these complexities and contradictions through an analysis ofthe characteristics and dynamics of contemporary globalization. Making sens of globalization i 56> falto comprehending and explaining world polities the twenty-first century. unifying complex metaphors presumANTHONY MCGREW Introduction A little over a century ago, the so-called ‘belle époque’ cof European globalization catastrophically imploded with the onset of the First World War, Global connec- tivity, as with war, has been central to the formation of the modern world system and essential to understand ing contemporary world politics (Bayly 2004, 2018; Osterhammel 2014). Yet within the academy, the sig- nificance of globalization is seriously contested, while beyond the academy it is deeply detested by many, including advocates of nationalist populism (para- doxically itself a global phenomenon). This chapter is, Making sense of globalization Globalization today is evident in almost every aspect ‘of modern life, from fashion to finance, social media to supermarket merchandise, multinational corpora- tions to the #MeToo movement. Indeed, it so integral to the functioning of modern economies and societies that it is an institutionalized feature of contemporary life, at least for the world’s most prosperous citizens. Universities, for instance, are literally global institu- tions, from the recruitment of students to the dissemi- nation of academic research. Mapping globalization In today's global economy, the fate and fortunes of entire nations, communities, and households across the world is bound together through complex webs of global trade, finance, and production networks. Such is the integration of the world economy that no national economy can insulate itself from the workings of global markets, as the 2008 global financial crisis (GEC) dem- “onstrated to such disastrous effect (see Ch. 16). A global crash was only averted through coordinated action by the world’s major economies at the 2009 G20 sum- mit which (at the time) prompted the ironic headline: “(Communist) China comes to the “rescue of global capitalism’. Before the eruption of the GFC, economic globaliza- tion (measured by global flows of capital, trade, and pro- duction) reached historic levels, consistently outpacing for almost three decades the growth of the world econ- ‘omy, Atits peak in 2007, global flows of capital, goods, and services were estimated at a staggering 53. pet cent organized into three parts. The fist is concerned with aking sense of globalization by addressing some fun- damental questions: What is globalization? What are its dominant features? How is it best conceptualized and defined? ‘The second part reassesses the current ‘crisis of globalization’ alongside its potential consequences forthe liberal world order and world politics. The third considers the contributions of globalization scholar- ship to advancing a critical understanding of twenty- fist-century global affairs. The chapter concludes with brief reflections on the three core framing questions. of world economic activity (GDB) (McKinsey. Global Institute 3016). Global economic integration had inten- sified and expanded to embrace most of the world’s _ population as the emerging economies of China, Brazil, India, and others were fully incorporated into a 24-hour world economy. Following the GFC, the € ion slowed dramatically, as turn of this century, now estimated at 39 per cent of world GDP, and expected to continue to grow (although ‘more slowly than in the recent past) (McKinsey Global Institute 2016; WTO 2018a; Lund et al. 2019). Every single working day, total turnover on the world’s money markets-amountsO "a reniarkabte $5 trillion, only just short"oPthe- Combined annual GDP of the UK and France, the fifth and seventh larg- est economies in the world, Téspectively, as of 2017. Few governments today have the resources to resist sustained 24-hour global market speculation against their currency without significant consequences for domestic economic stability and prosperity (see Ch. 27). Nor are governments necessarily the primary deci- sion-makers in today's global economy, since trans- national corporations, scores of which have turnovers which well exceed the GDP of many countries, __ account for over 33 per cent of world output, control global production networks which account for 30 per cent of world trade, and are the primary sources ofinternational investment in manufacturing and ser. ‘ices (UNCTAD 2018). Every iPhone isthe product of design services and components supplied by some 700 Companies across the globe from Malaysia to Malta. ‘Transnational corporations therefore have enormous influence over the location and distribution of produc tive, economic, and technological power. Their opera- tions confound the traditional distinction between the foreign and the domestic: the German automotive company BMW is the top exporter of automobiles from the US. BMW's largest manufacturing plant is in Spartanburg, South Carolina, and, together with other German-owned car plants located in the US; accounts for over 60 per cent of American car exports to China as of 2018, Contemporary globalization is associated intimately wa ee ee nication, from jet transport and container- ization to mobile phones and the internet (see Box 1-1). Digitalization has revolutionized worldwide com- munications through relatively cheap, instantaneous, round-the-clock global communication and informa- tion flows. Between 2005 and 2014, global data flows increased by a remarkable 45 times, while access to the internet, although still highly uneven, expanded from over I billion users to 4.1 billion in 2018 (55 per cent of the world’s population), with the majority in Asia (McKinsey Global Institute 2016). Globalization isnot an autonomous process, buts very much product ofthe actions of individuals as well as large organi- zations such as multinational companies. A powertlilustra- tion of this is the moamberas or suitase traders of Luanda, ‘Angola. fach week, an estimated 400 women fashion traders from the poorer distrits of Luanda organize buying trips to ‘io Paolo, Bazi. They head straight othe citys global fashion district, Feira da Madrugada, to purchase the latest Brazilian fashion merchandise, produced in the local informal economy, hich they bring back in suitcases to sellin Luanda’ markets Why Brazil? Because Angolans and Brazilians share a colonial history and language from the era of Portuguese empire. AS a result, Grailian telenovelas are hugely popular in Angola a is Brazilian fashion, not to mention Havaianas flip-flops. There is also a significant Angolan diaspora in Bra. More recently, ‘some moambeiras have begun trading with China too, 3s com- petition increases. These women ‘global entrepreneurs are ‘the agents ofan informal globalization which for many in the ‘Global South i abridge to economic security. (GBarreau Tran 2017) Chapter 1 Globalization and global politic ‘These global communication and mobility. infra es have made.it-possible-not only to" marraige ‘on_networks. across continents nd mobilize like-minded people time (see Box 1.2). The pontaneous global phe- nto structure just'ictime producti ‘but also to organize a across the globe in virtual real ‘#MeTo movement became a 5 vit Tate 2017 as women, from Afghanista justice for women. t wave of national- rough trans- nomen Nepaly organized to advocate for j ‘Somewhat paradoxically, the curren ist populism has acquired a global reach th national networking and cooperation across Europe, the US, and Latin America between like-min political parties and ideological factions (Moffitt 2017). People organize across borders on a remarkable scale, ‘such that currently over 38,000 international _non- governmental organi from Ambpesty International to Women Working Worldwide; operate acfOss 166 countries hosting some 481,000, meetings in 2018 alor (Gee Ch. 22)-Alongside these global civil society NGOs, the same communication and mobility infrastructures facilitate the uncivil activities of trans- national organized criminal and terrorist networks, from the Yakuza to Al Shabaab, human trafficking to money laundering, This illicit globalization, which has expanded exponentially over the last two decades, contributes to a more disorderly, violent, and insecure ‘world, Globalization isa source of unprecedented risks and societal vulnerabilities. Explanations of globalization tend to focus on three inter related factors: technics (technological change and social ‘organization); economics (markets and capitalism), and poli- ties (power, interests, and institutions) ‘© Technics-centra toany account of globalization, since it isa truism that without a modern communications infrastructure a global system or worldwide economy ‘would not be possible. ‘© Economies—crucial as technology is, 50 t00 i slobaiztion’ specifically economic logic. Capitalism’ insatiable demand for new markets and profits leads inevitably tothe globalization of economic activity. «okies sorand ee fries interests and pov, pols costs hid lope bsaon Technolgy provides he psa infact of abate, povies oat farce Gent chs bash Ui hve een ea aces rr the of globalization. oo aaa 21vu snr 22. ANTHONY MCGREW ‘AsGoldin and Mariathasan (2014) observe, the scale and intensity of global connectivity today has created a world of highly complex systemic interdependencies not just between cia ee tems, fromrfirance te the environment (see Chs 15, 24, 27, 28, and 29)” Such complexity, in turn, creates pro: found systemic risks in which, for example, household mortgage defaults in Ohio precipitate a financial chain reaction culminating inva global shock which threatens the collapse ofthe entire global financial system, Jf this ‘deems somewhat fantastical, histories of the 2008 GEC, Yo" Yescribe such a scenario and just how,close the world came to financial collapse and_economic catastrophe (Tooze 2018). From health pandemics-to the prolifera tion of technologies “of mass destruction, hacking of critical ififrastructures to global warming,-globaliza- tion is implicated in the emergence of a global risk s ety in which national borders provide litUe protection from distant dangers or the consequences of systemic failures. Preventing and managing these systemic risks has contributed to the expanding jurisdiction of global institutions and regulatory regimes (see Chs 19, 20, and 23). Over the last four decades, there has been a, dra~ atic growth in transnational and global forms of yovernance, rule-making, and regulation, from” Tor al G20 summits Gometimes referred To a8 the ‘ernment of globalization) to the-2018 Conference of the Parties to the Climate Change Treaty, alongside the many private global regulatory bodies such as the interational Accounting Standards Board e, forest Stewardship ‘Council, Today there are,over.260 jermanent intergovernmentalaorganizationsaconsti- ting a system of global governance, with the United lations at its institutional core. While in no sense a orld government, this system of multilateral gov- ‘ernance has been critical to both the promotion and regulation of globalization, ffom_the World Trade Organization's (WTO) mandate_to_liberalize, world trade to the International Labour Organization's role in promoting workers’ rights. For much of the world’s population, more significant are the humanitarian, levelopment, and peacekeeping functions of this sys- tem, which are vital to the human security of the most vulnerable. With the expanding jurisdictis | gove nance has come its deepening reach into the domes- tic affairs of states, as global standards, norms, and legal rules are incorporated into donvestic Taw or pub- lic policy and political discourse. National and local government bureaucracies are,increasingly.tegionally and globally networked, sharing information.and col laborating with their opposite numbers abroad on spat ters fromagricultural policy @ human trafficking, from the Financial Action Task Force (which brings together government experts on money-laundering from.major OECD “Ciunities) to the BRICS National, Security “Ralvisors network (which connects. senior national seciirity officials from the BRICS governments). Just a5 national economies have been globalized, so too have national politics and governance. While capital freely circulates the globe, the same is not the case for people: borders and national controls continue to matter even more than during the “belle Epoque’ of nineteenth-century globalization. Despite this, people—along with their cultures—are on the move on a scale greater than those historic nineteenth- century migrations. Though most migration is still Jn countries, the pattern of global migration has significantly altered: from the world’s South to North and from East to West, contributing to public percep- tions, especially inthe West, of a migrant crisis, despite evidence to the contrary (see Chs 14 and 25). Migration to affluent OECD countries reased from 3.9 million in 2000 to over 6 million in 2015, while across the entire ‘world 258 million people (almost 49 per cent of whom are women, and 164 million are migrant workers) were resident in countries outside those of their birth (UN JOM 2018; ILO 2018). Furthermore, despite the GFC, the world’s expanding middle classes are touring.the globe on a historically unprecedented scale, with some 1.3 billion tourist visits in 2017 (compared with 680 million in 2000 and 952 million in 2010). These tourists spent some $1.34 trillion in 2017, equivalent to the GDP. of Australia (WTO 2018a). With the resurgence of identity politics and the igainst globalization, migration has . contentious global issue even within nally multicultural and liberal societies. Migration highlights difference, which is perceived to threaten orthodox ethnic and cultural ideologies of national identity—what Kwame Anthony Appiah (2018) refers to as the ‘lies that bind’. It is an especially conspicu- ous illustration of how globalization both unites and divides neighbourhoods, communities, nations, and the world. Indeed, in this digitally hypercon- nected world there is little evidence of significant cul- tural convergence, despite the fact, for instance, that Netflix’s 137 million subscribers across 190 countries stream the same programmes, or Facebook's 2.27illion monthly worldwide users swap much con- ent, or even the 82 billion global viewings of PSY's Gangnam Style’, Rather than bridging cultural divi- ‘ions, some argue the internet reinforces heightened awareness of irreconcilable cultural or religious ferences (see Chs 17, 18, and 30). However, this view overlooks the growing significance of the mixing or hybridization of cultures expressed in everything from cuisine to the assertion of hyphenated identities (Asian-British, Italian-American, Japanese-Brazilian, Greek-Australian). If anything, cultural globalization is associated with a world of increasing cultural com- plexity in which, for instance, the youth of northeast Inbasge a (aslne of Korean popular culture) whilst Tbeyi (a French-Cuban twins musi- cal duo) performs in Yoruba, English, French, and Spanish. Analysing globalization Globalization isa historical process characterized by: © the srching of weet asl aa activiti€® across national_frontiers_such that events, decisions, aiid actions in one region of the world have the potential to impact directly and indirectly on individuals, communities, and countries in distant regions of the globe. For instance, civil. war and conflict in Syria and ‘Yemen has displaced millions of people, who have fled to adjacent states and even further to Burope and beyond seeking asylum. «the intensification, or the growing.magnitude, of interconnectedness in almost every sphere of tiod- ern life, from-the economic to the ecological from the global presence of Google to the spread.ofharm- ful microbes such as the SARS virus. « the accelerating pace of global. flows and, processes as the velocity with which ideas, news, goods, infor- mation, capital, and technology circulate the world increases. For example; during ‘Red October’ 2018, stock markets across the-globe experienced a syn- chronized collapse within minutes of the opening of trading. - «# the deepening enmeshment of the local and global such that the domestic and international are indis- tinguistiable, For instance, reducing carbon emis- sions in Mumbai or Glasgow can moderate the impact of climate change on the Pacific Tlanders of ‘Samoa and Kiribati (see Ch. 24). Materialist The most common approach conceives of {lobalzation asa substantive process of increasing, worldwide connectivity which is open to empirical and bistorical methods of enquiry. Constructivist: Globalization is conceived in ideational ‘terms as a principally discursive phenomenon which has ro objective or permanent meaning, but rather is what we (or they) make of it'(see Chs 11 and 12). ‘Ideological: Globalization is conceived as apolitical and economic project and ideology advanced by the most powerful states and elites) to fashion the world order according to their interests, eg neoliberal globalization ‘This chapter rests primarily on the materialist approach, although t draws on the other approaches Accounts of globali- zation often elde or combine these thee distinct approaches. “The concept of globalization focuses attention on the flows, connections, systems, and networks which transcend states and continents, the virtual and material world wide webs which sustain modern existence (see Box 1.3). It is indicative of an unfold- ing structural change in the scale of human social and economic organization, Human affairs are no longer organized solely on a local or national terri- torial scale, but are also increasingly organized on transnational, regional, and global scales. Examples include the global production networks of GAP and the year-long (2011-12) worldwide protests of the Occupy movement in 951 cities across 82 countries in the wake of the GEC. The concept of globaliza- tion denotes this significant shift in the scale of human social organization, in every sphere from the economy to security, connecting and transcending all continents—what Jan_Aart Scholte (2005: ch. 2) Do refers to as ‘transworld’ (as opposed to international) relations. In this respect, globalization is associ- ated with a process of deterri jon: as social, political, or economic actitiesare organized at the global of transnational levels, they become in a sig nificant sense disembedded or detached from their place or locale. Forvinstance, property. prices.in.the most expensiye neighbourhoods of the world’s major global cities Sa ig correlated with ae other than with prices in their respective national real-estate markets. faey 24 ANTHONY MCGREW Under conditions of globalization, the very idea of a national economy as coterminous with national territory is compromised because corporate owner: ship and production transcends borders, Many of the UK's largest companies have their headquarters in India, Japan, and Germany, while many small enterprises outsource theit production to China, Vietnam, and other East Asian countries. Even national borders are no longer always coterminous with national territory: Toronto airport is home to the US border x) “However, this structural shift is not experienced \V _{ uniformly across the world. Indeed, the concept of \ a) globalizati \v oul ntiat that of uni- versality, which implies worldwide convergence and inclusivity. By contrast, globalization is marked by highly differential patterns of inclusion, giving it what Castells (2000) calls a ‘variable geometry’. Western aT lobalized than are the Sub Sahara African states (see Che 16'and 26): Even within countries, globalization is differentially_experienced significantly between cities and rural areas, sectors of the economy, and between households in the same neighbourhood. “Thus, in both Western and sub-Saharan African states, clites are enmeshed ii*glabal networks, while the poor- est find” threniselves largely” excluded. Globalization exhibitsardistinetive geography of inclusion and exclu- sion with significant” distributional consequences, creating economic winiers and losers not just ainong countries but al56 within them. Indeed, globalization is associated with growing global inequality of wealth, income, and life chances (Alvaredo et al. 2018). For the most affluent, it may very well translate into ‘one ld) much of humanity it is associated with a deeply divided world marked by equality and exclu- sion. Beyond the West, globalization is frequently per- ceived as Westernization, stoking fears of imperialism and provoking anti-Western movements and resis- tance. Accordingly, the concept of globalization has no implied teleology: it does not presume that the process has a historical logic (teleology) or singular purpose (telos) leading inevitably towards a harmonious world society. Although geography and distance very much still matter, the concept of globalization is associated with a process of time-space ¢ to the impact of new technologies of mobility and communication effectively. ‘shrinking’ geographi- cal space and time. From live global coyerage of the inauguration of Donald Trump on 20 January 2017 to the global supply chains which put fresh fruit on UK supermarket shelves within days of being har- vested thousands of miles away, the world appears to be literally shrinking, A ‘shrinking world’ is also one in which the sites of power and the subjects of power quite literally are often continents apart. During the GEC, incipal agencies of decision- making, whether in Washington, Beijing, New York, “or London, were oceans apart from, the local.com- riunities subject to their policies. In this respect.the conceptOF globalization highlights the ways in which power is organized and exercised (or_ increasingly. has the potential to be) at a distance transcending the constraints of geography and territorial jurisdic- ion (see Case Study 1.1). This highlights the rela- tive denationalization of power in world politics in so far as power is organized and exercised not only ‘ona national scale but also on transregional, trans- national, and worldwide scales. This, combined with the complexity of a networked world, makes the exer- cise of power enormously opaque, such that identi- {ying responsible and accountable agencies is almost impossible, a situation dramatically illustrated by the GEC (Tooze 2018). Such complexity and opacity has very significant implications for all states, but most especially for liberal democracies which champion democratic accountability, transparency, and the rule of_aw, because it creates a public perception that they are subject to global or external forces over which elected governments exert little control. To summarize: the concept of globalization can be differentiated from that of internatignalization or international inte Internationalization refers to growing connections between sovereign inde- pendent nation-states; international interdependence refers to mutual dependence between sovereign states such that each is sensitive or vulnerable to the actions of the other. By contrast, the concept of globalization refers toa process of widening, deepening, and acceler- ating worldwide interconnectedness which transcends states and societies, dissolving the distinction between domestic and international affairs. Globalization can be defined as: «historical process involving a fundamental shift or transformation in the spatial scale of human social ‘organization that links distant communities and expands the reach of power relations across regions and continents,‘Thailand: used plastic bottles for recycling ‘© Muelekjost/Shutestck.com In 2018, jst as the worldwide Save our Oceans campaign to bban plastic waste disposal in the worlds seas gained political ‘momentum, a largely unnoticed criss inthe global recycing, system erupted, The residents of Thathan in easter Thailand were unaware thatthe increasing lorryloads of electronic waste hich arived atthe local recycling facility were connected to the crisis. A decision in Bejing in July 2017 to ban fom January 2018 this import of all recycled waste, to improve the nation’ envionment, led almost overnight to the near collapse ofthe _global trade in cycled waste. The ban was further extended in 2018 to include solid waste In 2016, almost 50 per cent ofthe ‘worlds 270 millon tonnes of recyclable waste was processed ‘outside its county of origin, with over 60 per cent of plastic and electronic waste exports from the G7 countries and 37 per cent ofthe worlds paper waste ending up in China and Hong | ong (Brooks, Wang, and Jambeck 2018; Hook and Reed 2018, | van der Kamp 2018). The global recycling trade transfers rub- | ish rom North to South and West to East. Critics refer toitas ‘toxic colonialism! Debating globalization Globalization isa contentious issue in the study of world politics. Indeed, some theorists would probably contest the discussion so far as taking globalization too seri- ously, Theoretical disagreement concerns the descrip- tive and explanatory value of globalization scholarship: whether it constitutes either a ‘conceptual folly’ or alternatively a new paradigm for understanding World politics. Although the controversy is far more nuanced, two broad clusters of arguments can be identified in this great globalization debate: the sceptical and the globalis. The sceptical argument contends that globalization is a highly exaggerated and superficial phenomenon—a Chapter 1 Case Study 1.1. Rubbishing globalization: the crisis in toxic trade (ne of the more significant consequences. (eeral tes)af the ban hasbeen to det ree exports fom the West other counties aco fla, which bythe end of Sore had become esate importers ofthe West pl te wate. Talands imports recorded a aggeing 1370 per center A second consequence ofthe ban was ater faramentay te economies of recyelng, Goverment 0 Gr eats, both cal and rattona, wer forced to rethink ‘reyng poles and o manage the immediate consequences the cs Inmany Bish eis and others across Europe, fustala andthe US eyed wate pled up or was posed cfin nai As aware ofthe cris gem rough the ates of ivengece and oer transnational entronmental tps resvane tothe ade mobilized acros As, Erope, and the US fom the ils lea and national ees tthe abl eve hough the Basel Convention on Hazardous Waste seks fo feguate te tage nharrdous rate an amendment tthe Cameron to cover eeycing wate se 0 come into force {ors)asithasnotacqatedasficent number of cout ra Featons Issn oppoied by vested interes in nds tan by Some Western goverment, inciing the US. The Basel Action Netort along with ther enuronmetl ups plays spent avocoy oe ths mutates context by presurngeminded government for tougher lobe fon similar tthe mote estcive Bama Convention smong Dian sates Sources ros, ang and beck 2018; Hook and Reed 2018; van der Kap 218 (Question 1: What key features of globalization does the recycling case ila? ‘Question 2: What are the ethical and normative isues raised by thiscase? myth or ‘conceptual folly’ that distracts atter the primary forces which determine world politics: state power, geopolitics, nationalism, capitalism, and imperial- ism (Hirst and Thompson 1999; Rosenberg 2000; Gilpin 2002). Those of a traditional realist or neorealist persua- sion argue that eee ‘and the anarchical structure of the state system-remalff'the principal determinants of world polities téday (Gilpin 3001; Mearsheimer 2018) (see Ch. 8):Globalization, or more accurately interna- tionalization, quite simply, is a product of hegemonic power. It is dependent entirely on the most power- ful state(s) creating and policing an open world order (whether the Pax Brijannica ofthe nineteenth, century or the Pax.Americana of the twentieth) which is con- ducive to global Commerce (see Box 1.4). It is therefore26 ANTHONY MCGREW Globalization is nota novel phenomenon and historians ‘suggest it has occurred indistinct waves nthe first wave, the age of discovery (1450-1850), lobalization was decisively shaped by European expansion and conquest. ‘The second wave (1850-1914), often referred to as the belle époque’ or Pax Britannica, involved a dramatic ‘expansion in the spread and entrenchment of European empires, followed by the collapse of lobalzation in 1914 ‘The third wave of contemporary globalization (rom the 19605 on) marks a new epoch of global connectivity which ‘many argue exceeds that ofthe belle époque ‘Some argue that a fourth wave of globalization is now in the making, riven by new digital technologies nd the emerging economic powers of China, Braz, and India, 4 contingent phenomenon, its fortunes entirely tied to those ofits such, globalization or internationalization does not alter the basicstructures tics, | tates and state power to national security and survival. While sceptics acknowledge_growing.interconnectedness, they argue that to label this condition ‘globalization’is entirely mis- leading since these flows are far more int@fiational and regional than global. Moreover, they rarely involve the deep integration of national economies, so are merely evidence of international interdependence. Those associated with the Marxist tradition share spective. Globalization has its origins in the inevitable expansionary logic"of @apitalism, and as such shares much in-common with, though its form is different to, the imperialisms of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (Harvey 2003, 20108). Globalization is anew label for an old phenomenon, but it has little explana- tory-value (Rosenberg 2005). It is a myth or ‘concep- tual folly’ which conceals the principal forces shaping ‘world politics, namely capitalism and capitalist impe- rialism (Rosenberg 2000). Sceptics therefore conclude that globalization. is, epiphenomenal; a derivative of more primary forces, such as geopolitics or capitalism. Globalization scholarship thus-not only lacks explana- tory power, but also offers a misleading interpretation of contemporary world politics. In contrast, globalists reject this harsh dismissal of globalization scholarship. Globalization, they argue, is a fundamental source of disruptive change in world politics. Castells, for instance, links global- sation to significant changes in the form of modern capitalism, which he argues is best conceived as anew epoch of “global informational, capitalism’ (Castells 2009): Other neo-Marxist accounts explore how this new epoch of global capitalism is reshaping the world order (W. Robinson 2014). Liberal accounts, by contrast, emphasize how globalization is creating a. “flat world” or an ‘emerging global network civiliza- tion-overlaying'the inter“state system (T. Friedman 2011; Khanna 2017: xvii). Finally, critical globaliza- tion scholarship, which embraces a diverse range of theoretical approaches, explores how globalization from below is associated with new forms of transna~ tional politics and (communicative) power in world politics: expressions of alter-globalizations advocat- ing for a fvore just and fair world (see Chs 9, 10, 11, and 22). Besides a shared focus on disruptive global social change, these accounts are united by their cri- tiques of orthodox theories of international relations. For some globalists—often referred to in the lit- erature as ihe” transformationalists—this. disruptive change is associated with significant transformations in world politics, creating a profoundly more complex, dangerous, and_uny . This is evident not just in historic from West to East and fronstate to non-state forces—but also in changes to modern statehood, societies, and the dynamics of world politics. Although transformationalists empha- size that globalization is neither inevitable nor irrevers- ible, they-argue-it-is-deeply socially embedded in the ‘comprehensive functioning of all aspects of modern societies. For transformationalists, the epoch of con- temporary globalization is not only historically unique but is also associated with a fundamental reconfigu- ration of how power is organized, distributed, exer- cised, and reproduced (see Box 1.3) (Held et al. 1999; Keohane and Nye 2003; Castells 2009; Khanna 2017). ‘Transforniationalists therefore argue that globalization requires a corresponding radical conceptual shift in the study of international relations. ‘The next part will explore how both sceptical and globalist perspectives offer distinctive insights into the current crisis of globalization and its implications for world politics. ion is creatispeak in 2007, though a though higher tana the {wm ofthe century By conta theron Genser of globatation have contmued to ery site the GEC, especialy dig! glbalenicn Globalisation has contd toa drat pomthin Yansnational and global for of govemance rule-making and regulation, bs a Contemporary globalzaonis not aunorm proces. Ni ‘highly uneven in terms of ts inclusivity and distributional consequences Chapter Globalization and global polities Globalization is associated with a proces of time-space Compression and linked to the deterttraization and the world polis, Atough global agencies may Tate £9 to trade Fome oftheir national autonomy for a greater chance of realizing nal interests doesnot diminish national sere cre pod as their absolute lea ight tole within tei" OW terstory. Globalization i part of the solution to state? growing Va crores Athough stats are incrasingy vulnerable 2 4 rermtheats,gobalzation ofers increased global suvelance ‘apacy and inteligeace cooperation rather than undermining national security. experiencing challenges to democracy, but these are not the result of globalization, but rather of other domestie factors. Norsthe tension or contradiction between caPi~ tatom and democracy in any sense newts structural, Globalization Simply aes this to anew evel and makes it ore publ visible ‘The reform and democratization of global governance would 6° ome way to addresing these challenges and the inequalities of ‘obalzatonBuitisafallay to argue that because of gobalization governments are unable to adres such challenges or inequalities, asthe Scandinavian welfare systems indicate state control of borders (or at the least the capacity to control) has probably never been greater. Impressive technolo ties and systems of monitoring and control of people movements fre available today. While globalization has certainly increased people mobility, atonal and international contolsremain resrc~ tive by comparison wth the free movement of capital around the lobe: lit migration and people trafficking isan isue which can ‘only be resolved through multilateral cooperation States are indeed studies? national affairs, However, the doctrine of sovereignty never presumed control, but rather the undisputed right to rule within a defined territory (see Chs 2 and 19). Sovereignty remains a principal juridical attributeChapter 1 Globalization and global polities. 33 governments—the entitlement of states to rule within their own territorial spaces—is being reconfigured or transformed, but in no meaningful sense eroded. of states, but it is increasingly divided and shared among local, national, regional, and global authori- tes, The sovereign power and authority of national ‘© Globalization scholarship presents thre challenges to traditional approaches to the study of word politics State-centrism, Western-centrsm, and static analysis ‘Globalization is associated with several on-going transformations in word politics from international to global Politics, from a liberal world order to apost-Wester global ‘order, and from intergovernmentalism to global governance. ‘Globalization requires a conceptual shift in thinking about ‘world politics, from a principally state-centric perspective 10 ‘the perspective of geocentric or global poltcs-the polities ‘of worldwide social relations Conclusion ‘This chapter has sought to clarify the concept of global- ization and to explain why it isso significant for under- standing contemporary world politics. It began by ‘examining critically the concept of globalization and exploring differing theoretical interpretations, nota- bly the sceptical and globalist accounts. Globalization is a contentious subject in the study of international relations because there is still fundamental theoreti- cal disagreement with respect to its descriptive and ‘explanatory power, not to mention its conceptual and theoretical status. Similarly, itis a highly contentious and divisive issue in political life since there are very divergent normative and political perspectives on whether itis benign or malign force, whether it should be promoted, resisted, or reformed, and what viable alternatives to globalization are desirable or feasible. Indeed, one of the most critical issues in world politics today is how globalization should be governed, to what struggle, played out purpose, and in whose interests: Questions © Global poltics is best described as contentious global politics because itis imbued with significant inequalities of power, Information, opportunities, and capabiites. «Globalization i not leading to the demise ofthe sovereign state, but ether tothe transformation of sovereign statehood, ‘Global governance is associated with a reconfiguration of the power and authority of national government across the globe every day, from the town hall to the citadels of global power (see Chs 5 and 13). “The chapter went on to analyse the three major sources ofthe current crisis of globalization and how it is implicated in a wider crisis ofthe liberal world order. Rather than the collapse of globalization, as many have argued, the evidence suggests it is entering a new phase. Furthermore, the alleged demise of the liberal world order is confused with a historic transition towards a post-Western global order which builds on the institu- tions and principles ofthe liberal order. ‘The final part of the chapter discussed the chal- lenges posed by globalization to traditional approaches to the study of world politics. It concluded by identify- ing and examining three major on-going transform: tions in world politics associated with globalization. Understanding globalization remains essential to com- prehending and explaining twenty-frst-century global politics 1. Distinguish the concept of globalization from those of internationalization and international interdependence. 2. Ciitically eview the three major transformations in world politics associated with globalization, 3. Whyis global politics today more accurately descritied as contentious global politics? 4, Compare the globalist and sceptical interpretations of globalization,