Reading 3: What is the relationship between politics and globalization? / Lee Jiyeon

 1)

Political globalization has been much discussed in the globalization literature, and on the other hand, it has focused on the decline of nation-states under the influence of global forces that have created various kinds of politics arising from the development of transnational networks. And the flow, and on the other hand, the process of de-territorialization and re-territorialization. For some, the process of political globalization opens the possibility of new liberation. There is little doubt that one of the most prevalent forms of political globalization is the worldwide spread of democracy based on parliamentary states. This is a kind of territorial-based globalization that is largely confined to the political form of the nation-state. The first dimension of political globalization is the geopolitics of global power. The second dimension of political globalization means the rise of a global normative culture. Globalization requires the presence of global players, such as powerful countries, to spread and implement global geopolitics, but there is another dimension of globalization that is less relevant to countries and cannot be reduced to a global normative culture. This can be said to be a form of non-territorial politics that occurs in multiple places and cannot be reduced to a single center. The concept of civil society is highly controversial and refers to the political realm between countries and markets where informal politics is simply conducted for the present purpose. From a global perspective, this is a new space that extends beyond the realm of state and government and is independent of global capitalism. In the post-governmental world without government, or in the "New Medievalism" of the local economy, the notion of national decline should be replaced by the notion of continuous change in the state change. The state is still a powerful actor, but exists in a more globally connected world that is completely out of control. The nation-state is not 'disappeared’ but transformed by becoming a functional component of this transnational device and a major subject of global capitalism. In this analysis, globalization makes it impossible for a nation-state to become independent by restructuring the state around world capitalism. What is being discussed here is a transformation rather than the demise of the nation-state. Moreover, the European example diverges attention in the global context in which the nation-state has continued to be a major political form of social organization. Throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America, the nation-state is generally the main expression of the nation. There is a need to distinguish between a nation and a nation-state. Most countries are ethnic countries, but there are particularly important differences in the context of political globalization. By the definition of Weber, a state is the monopoly of legitimate violence in a given territory, and a nation-state represents the unity of a defined political community and state. The separation of nationality and citizenship has blurred the boundaries between domestic and international law due to the influence of the global normative culture. As a result, immigrants can appeal directly to international law. International courts are playing an increasingly large role in national politics. Communication is central to politics. The national anthem is based on a centralized communication system, ranging from national systems of education and science, national newspapers, and media such as TV, to national celebrations and popular culture. Most ethnic countries are based on languages that are increasingly standardized over time. So far, this has been largely recognized as a national public domain. Most of the cases Habermas has taken relate to the national public domain. Moreover, the concept of the public domain has been theorized in terms of decline due to the rise of commercial mass media. What is more important during the ongoing discussion of the global public domain as a transnational space is the emergence of a global public discourse, a manifestation of discourse rather than a spatially defined entity. The public sphere is now full of what can be called the global public. This does not mean a specific public, but rather a global context in which communication is filtered. Global is not outside the social world, but inside in various ways. So you can see that political communication in the public sphere is increasingly framed by global issues. The "civil socialization" of politics reinforces the idea that politics is influenced by an increasingly normative global culture and refers to the transformation of the nation's state as a place of political struggle. In other words, the 'civil socialization' of politics means the commonality of the form of politics that connects regions and the world, countries, and superstates, and mobilizes various actors around a common political code. In a sense, the globalization of civil society follows patterns such as democracy, nation-states, and citizenship. Globalization has brought about the universalization of territorial norms and practices. As national norms became common, transnational connectivity of social movements and activist networks increased and globalization of environmental, personality, and identity politics combined to remove boundaries from civil society activities and create new interests and new communities. The image of a 'world without boundaries' has long been associated with the idea of globalization. The power of the global process of transcending borders, eliminating distance, and uniting through global catastrophes has provided a variety of powerful metaphors for the globalization literature. At the same time, frictionless flows and unrestricted mobility that make up globalization are generally considered to represent a threat to the nation-state. It would be far too simple to reduce the spatial dynamics of political globalization to the conflicts between flows and mobility associated with the global process, and the space and boundaries of the existing political sphere. However, there exists an interpretation of global transformation that focuses on the emergence of multiple and interdependent 'levels' of political organizations. We must face the need to rethink space and space. In short, the role and meaning of borders and spaces in the political composition have been greatly reevaluated as politics has been readjusted because of globalization. Awareness of the potential for transformation in globalization has encouraged 'spatial transformation' in social and political science. The idea of spatial transformation indicates an increasing interest in the processes in which social space is constructed and the ways in which space constructs social and political relationships, as well as in a given environment where social conflict, institutionalization, governance, and social transformation occur. The interest in new space and new forms of connection has made us realize that space is not just a 'given thing' that comes with territory, but constitutes social and political relationships. Space management is no longer considered an integral part of the establishment of a political system. The de-national and international concept of mobility emphasizes the way we regularly move between communities, identities, and roles and across borders in a way that cannot be mapped to geographical space.

2)

It was most impressive that communication was expressed as the center of politics. Regardless of the country, I think the president's position should be well maintained in communication with the people. In recent years, however, some South Korean presidents appear to have failed to communicate with the public. I think listening to the voices of the people of that country is a priority for globalization, as the saying goes, "Global exists inside in various ways, not outside of society."

3)

If I could build a states or a nation-states, which would I choose? And why?