Cold War Essay Example for Free

Cold War Essay The end of the Cold War and the plurality of new issues on the global agenda, to which are referred in this document as well as other literary reviews, have been accompanied by increasing calls for rethinking the foundations of a Globalization Theory and Theories of Globalization or discipline. To differing scholars, Theories of Globalization thought appears to be out of touch with the ground-breaking changes in world politics, as well as deficient in how to explain them to the masses and interested parties. Justin Rosenberg, International Relations scholar, has suggested how strange it is for such momentous events, such as the collapse of Soviet Communism, the strains of European integration, and the economic growth of China (which presently contains one-fifth of the worlds population) and not be inclusive of theoretical logic within other theories. â€Å"These events, within Rosenberg’s Globalization Theory, are part of a gigantic world revolution of modernization, industrialization, nationalism, and globalization in which the West has been caught up for the last two hundred years, tend to be excluded from most International Relations theory. † (Tickner, 2001, p. 9) In popular usage, globalization is linked to the idea that advanced capitalism, aided by digital and electronic technologies, will eventually destroy local traditions and creates a homogenized, world culture. â€Å"Critics of globalization argue that human experience everywhere is becoming essentially the same. Long believed to be a fair characterization of life at the beginning of the twenty-first century† (Qin-Hilliard, 2004, p. 143) Given that globalization has by now come to mean so much, and so little, this paper will discuss globalization specifically as a mode of empire, as an imperial project that has historically operated simultaneously through domestic and foreign policy while obscuring the connections between multiple theories. Looking at everyday life in the industrial international markets and at the responses of the populace at local, national, and transnational scales allows for an approach that would help advance a critical understanding for studying globalization. Multiple Theories of Globalization have burgeoned over the last decade. Arguably, perhaps the most sophisticated critique of Globalization Theory is contained in Justin Rosenberg’s The Follies of Globalization Theory. Nevertheless, globalization remains an essentially contested concept, expressed in a range of important debates. â€Å"†¦there is an ongoing debate between those who believe that it is primarily mythological (or ideological) and those who believe that it is a new reality with important structural features. † (Held et al. 1999) â€Å"The proliferation of Theories of Globalization reflects the polytonality of the phenomena at hand. In this light, globalization can neither provide a new theoretical grand narrative nor be seen as the only path to economic development. We see Theories of Globalization above all as a framework to deal with social complexity (Mittelman 2000). Within the globalization framework we find a host of analytical tools, such as the dialectic between territorialization and de-territorialization, and the concepts of transnationalism, hybridity, and borderlands, which provide a more nuanced picture of the changing face of religious and cultural life in the Americas. † (Marquardt et al, 2003, p. 3) â€Å"There is something about the last three hundred years which sets them apart from all other epochs in human history. In the field of international relations this is especially obvious since these centuries see for the first time the emergence of a states-system which covers the entire planet. † (Rosenberg 1994, p. 1) Examining the capital mobility impacts on cash transfers in universal and corporatist conservative state contexts, none of the possible relationships between dimensions of international capital markets and cash income maintenance is consistent with conventional globalization theory. Rosenberg theorems outlines a broad historical materialist framework for analysis and then challenges the realist a statement or idea that the masses accept as self-evident or obvious. It can be accepted as a model that the geo-political core of the disciplines subject matter is philosophy the most general branch of metaphysics, concerned with the nature of being are distinct from the wider structures of social reproduction develops an ambitious and intellectually rich. â€Å"Stated logic is a pervasive version of Marxs social theory of capitalist society as an alternative (i. e. non-realist) way of understanding the modern international system. † (Rengger, 2000, p. 55) Globalization Theory assumes or explicitly argues that business will resist moderate-to-high levels of welfare provision that raise the reservation wage, create work disincentives, contribute to fiscal imbalances, and engender high taxes. Instead of being an outcome driven and explained by a multitude of interrelated processes and necessary preconditions, economic globalization has become conceptualized in mainstream economic thinking and radical political debates as the universal cause. In his provocative book The Follies of Globalization Theory, Rosenberg (2000, 2-3) offered a compelling critique of the use of globalization as the universal explanation by social/globalization theorists: The term globalization, after all, is at first sight merely a descriptive category, denoting either the geographical extension of social processes or possibly, as in the working definition, the intensification of worldwide social relations And the globalization theorists clearly intend something more than this. Explicit in much of Globalization Theory is the notion that international financial integration is particularly consequential for larger welfare states that significantly depart from market-conforming precepts. For example, â€Å"In this view, the social democratic welfare states of the Nordic countries and the generous occupationally based social insurance systems of continental Europe are under especially strong pressures to reduce costs and restructure along market conforming lines. On the other hand, alternative theoretical argument highlights institutional features of these welfare states (e. g. , universalism and its political correlates) that may buffer them from the economic and political pressures flowing from globalization. † (Swank, 2002, p. 10) Related institutionalized international order is also, (defined and recognized as a society with obligations and responsibilities exist and grow by virtue of membership and especially by virtue of the express consent given by states to international law), the chief mechanism for regulating and monitoring international order. â€Å"However, most important of all, cosmopolitan liberals emphasize that growing institutionalization is the only way in which liberal forms can be globalized, especially in the context of globalization theory. † (Rengger, 2000, p. 106) Justin Rosenberg writings continued to suggest dominating influence of stability or order versus justice, which abstract from real-world issues. Rosenberg call for theory grounded in historical and social analyses is intrinsic to in his Globalization Theory which will be compared to Theories of Globalization as this paper progress. â€Å"He suggests that global issues can be better explained through narrative forms of explanation rather than social-scientific methodologies of conventional International Relationship. † (Tickner, 2001, p. 9) International economic scholars, based on postulates of past findings, have made a significant contribution to the study of economic globalization through theorization of its inherent occupation of space and sheer quantity of material. The distinctive contribution of Globalization Theory and Theories of Globalization within the crowed study of social, economic, cultural, and political has yielded increasingly single and autonomous global environment. Not accepting the policy of some scholars and instead describing the terminology as unclear or too vague and useless for understanding contemporary global economic change, many researchers and analysts embrace the important reasoning of how and why globalization will be a standard for discipline for the foreseeable future, â€Å" †¦as mutually constitutive material processes and ideological discourses, not the least because the term has now gained so much currency in the political and business world. In the context of his critique of international relations and globalization studies, Rosenberg argued that we need to take Globalization Theory s seriously, since its claims combine to exercise a kind of theoretical veto over other, more valuable resources for understanding both the contemporary world in general and its international politics in particular. (Yeung, 2002, p. 285)