In the past few decades, increasing attention to social issues has risen and the development of new methods to address this demand for change implemented, with varying degrees of success in the overall scheme. Methods of engaging in the new social movements of the twenty first century take different forms ranging from environmental and sexual reforms to religious revolutions and alternative ways of addressing globalization. As a result, a diverse number of interests groups have sprung up, each with their own agenda, making adhering to a single, universal cause difficult and oftentimes a point of contention. The conflicts of interest arising between grassroots movements and state involvement illustrate the larger issue of attempted collaboration local and international bodies in order to incorporate all parties. Unfortunately, such collaboration has instead fallen into a state of corporate control dominated by states of the global North. Exacerbating the North-South divide is the idea of “universalism”; while at face value an all-inclusive concept, upon deeper examination it reflects Western thinking and structures of neoliberalism and capitalism in maintaining the status quo. Consequently, recent localized, action-based response movements seeking to challenge the status quo are still entrapped within the context of a world dominated by neoliberalism under the guise of universal equality.
Universalism as a concept is not inherently hierarchical or exclusivist, yet the term which originates from Western ideas inevitably has a decidedly Western influence, and therefore takes on a dominating role in application to global social movements, many of which cannot identify with the same cause (Nussbaum 446). As in the new sexual politics,...
... middle of paper ...
...the rigid neoliberalist constructs, but the methods and tools at their disposal are often those allocated to them by the existing systems of inequality. Therefore, by operating within neoliberalism’s previously defined constructs, such organizations not only stay stagnant within the world system, but also contribute to the systems of power and money. Under this exploitative structure the system of law and governance does not apply universally to all parties, and thus exacerbates the North-South divide. The economic, political, and social advantage of nations at the top of the hierarchical global economy grow stronger when institutions overpower the representation of the local in even the venues for reform. Consequently, the overwhelming presence of neoliberalism in purported reform movements attest to the lingering effects of capitalism on modern day social reform.
Falconer, D. (2013, September 20). 'Theme 1: Social Protest Against Globalization/Neoliberalism.’ Lecture conducted in 'Introduction to Social Justice, 38-101' from the University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario.
Edkins, Jenny, and Maja Zehfuss. Global Politics: A New Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
This journal article, “Cultural Relativist and Feminist Critiques of International Human Rights - Friends or Foes?” by Oonagh Reitman seeks to rouse discussion about the similarities between two critiques of universal human rights: cultural relativists and feminists, despite the antagonistic position both groups tend to take against each other. In the beginning, he lays out the basis of critique of international human rights by each camp. Cultural relativists argue that the universal human rights which are earned simply ‘by virtue of being human’ (Donnelly in Reitman 1997, 100) are insensitive to the diversity of culture. Feminists, on the other hand, criticize that universal human rights guarantee only men’s rights and that ‘gender equality and freedom from discrimination for women is given a low priority in the international arena’ (Reitman 1997, 100).
(Turner and Killian 1987) cited in (Diani 1992, p. 4) define social movements as a “collectivity acting with some continuity to promote or resist a change in the society or organisation of which it is part. As a collectivity a movement is a group with indefinite and shifting membership and with leadership whose position is determined more by informal response of adherents than by formal procedures for legitimizing authority”. Turner and Killian regard a social movement as a peculiar kind of collective behavior that is contrasted to regularity and institutional behavior. Additionally, Turner believes that social movements do not necessarily coincide with movement organisations, although these organisations can carry out a large part of the movement tasks and it is often help to control and speak for movements (Diani 1992).
Neoliberalism is a policy model of social studies and economics that transfers control of economic factors to the private sector from the public sector. ... Neoliberal policies aim for a laissez-faire approach to economic
Weiss, L. (1997),’Globalization and the Myth of the Powerless State’, in New Left Review, September-October, 225 (1), pp. 3-27 [Online].
Social Revolutions in the Modern World is a compilation of essays, which updates and expands arguments Skocpol posed years earlier regarding social revolutions in her previous book, States and Social Revolutions. The updated arguments seek to explain how we can better understand recent revolutionary upheavals in countries across the globe and why social revolutions have happened in some countries, but not in others. Throughout the book, Skocpol illustrates how ideas about states and societies can aid in identifying the particular types of regimes that are susceptible to the growth of revolutionary movements as well as those that are vulnerable to seizure of state power by revolutionary aggressors. Skocpol argu...
In its essence, neo-liberalism advocates free trade, private enterprise, the free flow of capital across borders and, importantly, restrictions on the power of trade unions. These restrictions are important to study and discuss because the world today is no longer regulated by the orthodox laws of economics where supply equals demand (more or less). Instead, we witness radical inequalities and volatility in market conditions. Unemployment remains frighteningly high in many parts of Europe while many workers in parts of Asia and Africa suffer exploitation and work punishingly long hours in extremely poor conditions for a pittance.
“A global citizen is someone who identifies with being part of an emerging world community and whose actions contribute to building this community’s values and practices.” According to Global Citizens Initiative, a nonprofit global social enterprise, this is what it means to be a global gitizen. It is necessary to understand the defining factors of a global citizen in order to understand Johansson Dahre’s quarrels about the human rights discussion. Dahre argues that there is no middle ground between universalism and cultural relativism. Thorough analysis and critique of this dichotomy manifests a divergent human rights theory, Relative universalism. Dahre’s suggestion that Relative universalism
In the face of media campaigns and political sanctions, the question about whether we owe the global poor assistance and rectification is an appropriate one. Despite television advertisements displaying the condition of the poor and news articles explaining it, the reality is the majority of us, especially in the Western world, are far removed from the poverty that still affects a lot of lives. The debate between Thomas Pogge and Mathias Risse regarding our obligation to the poor questions the very institution we live in. Pogge created a new framework in which the debate developed. He introduced a focus on the design of the institutional global order, and the role it plays in inflicting or at least continuing the severe poverty people are exposed to. Whilst both Mathias Risse and Thomas Pogge believe that the “global order is imperfectly developed. It needs reform rather than revolutionary overthrow”, they differ on whether or not it is just and entitles the global poor to assistance. Pogge believes that the global order is unjust as it “helps to perpetuate extreme poverty, violating our negative duty not to harm others unduly”. Risse believes that the institution is only incompletely just and can be credited to improving lives of the global poor. According to him, these improvements contribute to its justifiability and negate any further obligation we have to the poor. Through assessing their debate, it seems that one’s obligation to the poor depends on one’s conception of duty, their unit of analysis, and whether improvement rectifies injustice. On balance, it seems that we do indeed owe the poor, only we may lack the means to settle it.
David McNally (2006). ‘The Invisible Hand is a Closed Fist: Inequality, Alienation, and the Capitalist Market Economy’ from Another World is Possible: globalization and Anti-Capitalism, 2nd edition, Arbeiter Ring, 60-95.
When looking at normative theories of politics, the main distinction is between cosmopolitanism and communitarianism. In this essay the term community shall refer to political communities, or more specifically, states. It is important to note that these political communities have been defined territorially, and not necessarily by culture, although this is taken for granted to an extent by communitarianism. Communitarians say that each community is different, and therefore should act accordingly with each other. In other words, state autonomy should be absolute and law and moral standards should be self-determined by the community itself alone. Furthermore, communities should have no obligations to other political communities or any sort of international law. Contrastingly, Cosmopolitans say that there should be an overriding universal moral standard to which all states (or communities) should adhere. If a state is infringing on the rights of the individual or humanity, then intervention is appropriate and just. (Steve Smith, The Globalisation of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations p. 173A)
Globalization can briefly be defined as ‘something’ that affects and changes the traditional arrangements of the state system. It is a term that directly implies change and therefore is a continuos process over a long period of time as compared to quickly changing into a wanted or desir...
Since the late twentieth century, the world has experienced a vast transformation with regards to world economies, culture, and politics. The great advancements in technology and communication since the late twentieth century has served a catalysts for what is known today as globalization. The ambition to develop a single global economy along with a universal culture are the promises of globalization. Perhaps the clearest evidence that demonstrates globalization is a reality is the fact that at this point in time very diverse cultures form around the world closer to each other than ever before. That being said, when it comes to the spreading of democracy and human rights, having world cultures closer to each other can prove to be beneficial
Today's world is full of problems present on an international scale. Yet, differences amongst states compel them to eschew cooperation. The division between the global North and South is the greatest challenge to global governance. The contrast in economic welfare, political stability, and culture among states creates many dilemmas for the international community. The economic differences between highly developed economies and the rest of the world deters cooperation. In addition, social differences between North and South create cultural clashes that breed violence, and adds difficulty to forming international norms. Moreover, the political weakness of some states in the global South create security dilemmas and keep global governance initiatives away from success. The international order is skewed in favour of the global North and serves to empower them. However, international leaders can solve these issues by promoting global equity. In order for global governance to achieve its fullest potential, the world must first address the inequality of states.