POLSC 188 | Prof.

Mendoza de Leon, Karla Mendoza, James Padua, Heather

March 27, 2013

GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY: DEMOCRATIZING GLOBALIZATION Global civil society is seen as the backlash to both globalization and economic liberalization as it surmounts to challenge neoliberal globalization and neoliberal capitalist hegemony (Evans, 2008) Failures of neoliberalism (See Washington Consensus, on-going economic crisis, transnational crimes) Primacy of corporatism failed transnational social movements emerged and gained salience The spread of multinational corporations and the increasing concentration of capital have created the conditions that can turn globalization on its head. (Lerner, 2007) Counter-hegemonic globalization a globally organized project of transformation to replace the hegemon or the dominant global regime maximizing democratic political control and making development of human capacities equitable and environmental stewardship its priority Double movement two-pronged movement that shaped the development of market societies (Karl Polanyi) 1. laissez faire the efforts by a variety of groups to expand the scope and influence of self-regulating markets. 2. movement of protection the initiatives, again by a wide range of social actors, to insulate the fabric of social life from the destructive impact of market pressures. Civil Society comprises the private domain which exists in the space between (a) the state (b) the economy Elements of Civil Society (Van Rooy, 2004): 1. Location separation from state and market Political community (Aristotle)

societas civilis (Roman Cicero) Civil Society (Enlightenment 18th century), debate on capitalism (19th century), Gramsci and the early Marxist (early 20th century), Iron Curtain and the third wave of democratization (late 20th century) all refer to the state and later the market, but the end of 20th century, civil society is seen as a place, or a constellation of actors occupying that space, that is distinct from this thing called the state, and this thing called the market 2. Organization a specific, organizational identity Civil society and NGOs civil society hints at political relationships, wide swaths of social organization, and battles over the hearts and minds of citizens nongovernmental organization is a far more pedestrian phrase 3. Inspiration altruism/moral highground -ethical inspirations to better humankind Rebirth of civil society after cut backs for protection like trade unions and social democratic forces. Businesses recommended governments to attack power of trade unions and reduce state expenses on social welfare. World Systems Approach a more sophisticated variant of dependency theory focuses on the transnational nature of capital and labor flows and its implications for economic and political process on two levels: societal and reproduction of global inequalities Posits the existence of a hierarchical interstate system of unequal states and markets, with a hegemon (the dominant power, economically, politically, and militarily) and economic zones of core, periphery, and semi-periphery. (Moghadam, 2009) Occupy Movement Occupy Wall Street is a leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the

revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants. a series of worldwide protests which started in 17 September 2011, Zuccotti Park, New York (Manhattan Financial District) a response to economic hardships that cut across all income and education levels, a call for World Revolution decries the concentration of wealth to the top 1% of Americans

Negative Implications of Globalization Social and Economic Polarization Critics consider that globalization has brought this cultural role into question because it denies an authentic cultural identity. In view of this, global homogenization should mean complete domination of the western understanding of art and culture and the standardization of values, wishes, ideas, styles and beliefs. But this is not the case. One could say that there is total cultural chaos rather than order, with creolization being an indicator of this type of condition. Cultural differences survive, but, due to expansion they become familiar to us, so today we do not perceive them as something unknown. The widening gap between the North and the South at international level, and between haves and havenots at national level is another serous aspect of globalization. In fact, the real test to globalization is through its success in reducing the gap between the rich and the poor at local, national and global levels. Globalization has forced many countries in various parts of this world to regulate to a lower league the most fundamental needs of their peoples (Muzaffar, 1998: 183). The equitable distribution of food, adequate health care facilities, and the quality of education are no longer priority concerns the political agendas of the governments in these countries. Political Instability The role of government in this process is reduced to the mere acceptance of what political globalization imposes. In the globalized world of politics there is no more room for mimesis (imitation), everything is imposed. The states economic role is being reduced to ensuring optimal conditions in their economic-legal-political systems for the activities of TNCs. Multinational corporations are main instruments of globalization. They possess huge capitals and assets. As profit maximizers, they establish their factors in many developing countries where cheap workers and raw materials are found. Because of their size and their contributions to national economies in terms of taxes and employments, they influence decision-making processes in those countries. Once they established, none has the

Globalization what about it? Economic globalization, including increases in trade, foreign investment, and migration, is widely agreed to be occurring through a combination of improvements in technology and decreased transportation costs, as well as deliberate policy choices on behalf of many national governments to liberalize their economies and participate in the development of global institutions. Thus, the policy aspect of economic globalization is a cumulative outcome that results from the choices of many individual countries to increase their integration with the global economy (Aisbett, 2003). Globalization is the latest stage of capitalism, and that its features have given rise to transnational movements of protest and resistance. Collective action is organized at local, national, and transnational levels in fluid and flexible ways; it is directed at states, corporations, and institutions of global governance; and it calls for alternative values, institutions, and relations (Mohagdam, 2009). Proponents of economic globalization have had a tendency to conclude that dissent and criticism are the result of ignorance or vested interest (Bardhan 2003). To its fiercest critics, globalization, the march of international capitalism, is a force for oppression, exploitation and injustice.

ability to stop them from withdrawing their investments or moving their capitals from country to another whenever it is in their advantage to do so. In spite of their contributions, the given privileges are not without price. Their activities usually leave serious effects on many host economies; they even sometime create civil unrests. This is because these companies control not only markets, but also peoples (Wooldridge and Micklethwait, 2000). Economic instability and persistent unemployment Globalization has significant impact on local entities. Its complexity takes decisive dimensions in particular with regard to its effects on labor immigration from the South to the North. In many cases this problem not only has political reflections, but also social dimensions. Case in point: Pinochets Chile Erosion of trust in political and economic institutions Whether by active design or by the inherent nature of the process, large corporations often appear to be the biggest gainers from globalization. Dissatisfaction with this pattern has led many critics to label the current course of globalization as 'corporate globalization'. It is important to note that for many people, benefits to large corporations enter their personal utility functions negatively. This may be partially attributable to envy, but there is also evidence of two more logically motivated reasons. Firstly, there is the assumption that if corporations benefit, someone else must be loosing, or at least gaining less than they deserve. Secondly, there is a perceived link between increasing wealth and increasing power. Many people consider corporations to be already too powerful, they do not like or trust large corporations, and they feel very uncomfortable with the fact that many corporations are richer and more powerful than the governments of the countries in which they are operating. Thus even a change that increases personal income may be considered welfare decreasing if a large corporation benefits disproportionately more. Globalization and Civil Society Another apparent outcome of globalization and a challenge to conventional theories of social movements was the rise in the late 1990s of what have been variously

called transnational advocacy networks, transnational social movements, and global social movements. There is now some consensus among scholars that the response to global economic, political, and cultural developments has taken the form of transnational collective action, including the emergence of transnational social movements and advocacy networks that focus on human rights, the environment, and economic justice. A transnational social movement has come to be understood as a mass mobilization uniting people in three or more countries, engaged in sustained contentious interactions with political elites, international organizations, or multinational corporations. The Crisis of Global Governance and a Compromise Solution Legitimacy of their targets existence as global players Focuses on the democratic deficit or representative failure of these institutions, either in their own governance, or in the cumulative failures of their member governments or shareholders

Through democracy, members of a given public take decisions that shape their destiny jointly, with equal rights and opportunities of participation and without arbitrarily imposed constraints on debate. In one way or another, democratic governance is participatory, consultative, transparent and publicly accountable. By one mechanism or another, democratic governance rests on the consent of the governed (Scholte 2001:6) Yet even in smallest democratic units, there are always impediments to such participation and obstacles to the subsequent accountability of governors Globally, the problems (1) inadequate participation and (2) accountability, are multiplied a billion-fold: in the modern world, it is increasingly difficult for the citizen to be engaged meaningfully in global decisions

Scholte offers a few examples of the inability of citizens to have much say in what goes on globally (Scholte 2001: 1214): Lack of control Lack consultation Lack of global representation Lack of central oversight

need to be changed, theres no way to change them (Naim 2000: 34) This philosophical approach follows contract theorist (Rawls) which follows Rousseau and Kant which imagines idealized social contract among the peoples of the world. Habermas notion of deliberative democracy (whereby an individual is deeply involved in decision-making, ad is not merely a filler-of-ballotboxes) would also find a home in this approach Cosmopolitans very much unlike statist thinkers; welcome the erosion of the state sole prerogative over sovereignty and would encourage the participation of local, regional and other levels of government in the picture, as well as the involvement of CSOs. As Held explains: A cosmopolitan democracy would not call for a diminution per se of state power and capacity across the globe. Rather, it would seek to entrench a develop democratic institutions at regional and global levels as a necessary complement to those at the level of the nation-state (Held 1997: URL)

Alternative Theories and Proposals Improved democratic practice at the international level

The Theories There are several schools of thought long percolating in the academic world that focus on global governance. These include: statism/realism, liberal internationalism, cosmopolitan democracy, world polity and theories of radical communitarianism. Depending on their notions of global legitimacy and the current state of international affairs, such thinking has generated a variety of proposals for action. Main focus: Cosmopolitan Democracy Focus from the state to the individual Identifies the individual as the holder of key rights Such consent implies that the individual, not only the states, would have a right to examine the workings of global governance institutions and demand accountability from them

Global Civil Society A global civil society is thus composed of those organizations that: Address political issues that were largely ignored by all the mainstream political parties at the time, growing popular concern could not therefore be channeled through conventional political routes. Address issues that are truly global and which concern large-scale disparities of power Seeks three goals: (1) influence public policy, (2) reform institutions, (3) and change public attitudes Pursue 2 strategies: mass campaigning and the use of the mass media Constitute global movements; usually seek to create international networks and derive

As Lori Wallach describes such a new world would be different in this way: There would be a global regime of rules that more than anything create the political space for the kinds of value decisions that mechanisms like the WTO now make, at a level where people living with the results can hold the decision makers accountable. Right now, there are decisions, value-subjective decisions, being shifted into totally unaccountable, international realms where, if the decision is wrong, there is no way to fix it. If the decision makers are self-interested, and as a result themselves

enhanced legitimacy from them, promote an ethos of internationalism, and favor simultaneous actions at the local, national, and international levels (Clark 2001: 17-18) 4 Clumps of ideological responses to globalization: Note: Goodman suggests that these ideological vantage points shape the strategies taken up around the global institutions 1. Rejectionist/ confrontationalist the left opposes global capitalism; both right and left want to preserve national sovereignty 2. Supportive - favour of global capitalism and the rule of law 3. Reformative largely NGOs from northern countries with a cosmopolitan ideology that identify themselves as global civil society seek to make global institutions more responsive to the poor; aim to civilise globalization 4. Alternative/ transnational resisters - describes as members of the new social movements carry their local struggles across national borders; want to opt out of globalization

These histories introduce the origins of the legitimacy debates. The critiques and tactics undertaken by members of the new movement have been unsettling for some, both within and outside the movements and that made it uneasy situation triggered the legitimacy backlash Anti-globalization protesters on World Bank o A phase that entered the World Banks long-standing and diverse relationship with civil society organizations Phase that World Bank managers hoped they had avoided Used to its usual grouping of NGOs, the Bank had not counted on a new movement that brought new people.

References:
Abo Gazleh, Mohammad. (2001). Globalization and Politics: the Effects of Globalization on Human Life Aspects. International Conference on Malaysia and Globalization,Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya. Aisbett, E. (2003). Globalization, Poverty and Inequality: are the criticisms vague, vested, or valid? Prepared for the NBER Preconference on Globalization, Poverty and Inequality . Cox, R. (1999). "Civil society at the turn of the millenium." Review of International Studies 25: 3-28. Evans, P. (2008). "Is an Alternative Globalization Possible?" Politics and Society 36 (2): 271-305. Moghadam, Valentine. (2009). Globalization & Social Movements: Islamism, Femnism, and the Global Justice Movement. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. van Rooy, Alison. (2004). The Global Legitimacy Game: Civil Society, Globalization, and Protest. Palgrave Macmillan. Unknown author. (2001). Globalisation and its critics. The Economist, retrieved March 20, 2013. <http://www.economist.com/node/795995>.

Strands of todays globalization Seattles situation in 1999 to create the heterogeneous, leaderless, multi-tactic and ideological phenomenon now understood as Global Civil Society o Talking about rainforests led us into talking about the 3rd world debt. Which led to the issue of climate change then to transnational corporations The more you talk about these things the more you realize that the subject is not on environment anymore but the economy and the pressures the countries are doing to undercut any efforts they make to deal with environmental issues