Globalization and the Democratic State

Introduction
According to the article, a thorough evaluation of global democratic theory must begin
with an analysis of how globalization affects the nation-state and what it means for conventional
ideas of democracy. Given the pervasive importance of the state in modern international politics,
democratic theories must take into account how their distinct visions might be put into practice.
Democratic thinking largely presupposed that the nation-state was crucial to democracy by
defining "the people's" political rights and detailing what social aims the people should pursue.
The rise of modern globalization has seriously questioned these presumptions given that there
are new sites of power and authority beyond the state. Current ideas of political community and
representative government, which support democracy within the state, are put to the test by the
state's demanding function.
This article initially describes the essential characteristics of a nation-state before
examining various viewpoints on how globalization affects state power and capacities in order to
address these difficulties. The rise of neo-liberalism and some of the popular responses to and
discussions regarding globalization are then taken into account. The chapter then looks at how
democratic theory has responded to these changes in how it perceives the function of the
beginning of modern democratic society.
Summary
The modern state is a historically unique kind of political organization that has spread across the
globe to become the dominating political structure. The modern state is a type of territorial
administration in which the most important duties are centralized in a form of government
supported by a monopoly on the ability to use force and possession of the right to tax. This
capacity to rule includes the capacity to create national legislation, sign international treaties, and
shape the identity and loyalties of its populace. The capacity for sovereign governance is also
rooted in a state's claim to absolute control over its internal affairs and, consequently, in a right
for other states to refrain from interfering in its territory. While the sovereign state is an
institution built on legal autonomy and collective governance, it also typically stands for a
political community that has some fundamental beliefs about its own identity as a whole and
how society should be run. While some scholars say that the country and nationalism are recent
phenomena that have been created by political leaders in response to the dissolution of traditional
communities, others argue that the nation and nationalism are based on primordial ideas of
lineage and territory. Third, the transformationalist perspective views current globalization as a
multifaceted process that is changing how political, social, and economic processes are carried
out.
The current state of globalization, according to many critical theorists, is purposefully formed by
state policy rather than being a natural or inevitable process. Neoliberal free market policies
strive to limit the state's economic latitude while also opening up national economies to foreign
capital. Due to neoliberal globalization, the nation-state confronts significant difficulties,
particularly in light of the destabilizing impacts of the 2008 global financial crisis. These issues
result from a tension between the state's duty to defend and represent the interests of the nation
and the requirement to create a society with economic adaptability capable of competing in
international markets. First of all, the competition state has fewer social policies it can easily
impose. Second, due to neo-liberal globalization, nation-states are increasingly beholden to
interests outside of their borders. Thirdly, under the direction of the competitive state, the
formulation and execution of governmental policy merge with the principles of the market.
Many critical theorists contend that state policy has intentionally shaped the current
globalization, not that it is natural or inevitable. Neoliberal policies that support free markets
seek to limit the state's economic flexibility while opening up national economies to foreign
capital. Neoliberal globalization poses significant obstacles for the nation-state, especially in
light of the destabilizing impacts of the 2008 global financial crisis. These issues result from a
tension between the state's duty to defend and represent the interests of the nation and the
requirement to create a society with economic adaptability capable of competing in international
markets. First of all, the competition state has less social policies it can easily impose. Second,
due to neo-liberal globalization, nation-states are increasingly beholden to interests outside of
their borders. Thirdly, under the direction of the competitive state, the formulation and execution
of governmental policy merge with the principles of the market.
The scattered authority of the state has prompted many different responses from democratic
theorists. The gap between left and right politics has, for the most part, remained sharp as ever,
but since the middle of the 1990s, there has been a noticeable increase in cosmopolitan
academia, which has widened the gap between nationalist and cosmopolitan ideas. In order to
provide a concise account of how the democratic theory has responded to the growth of
globalization and the changing nature of the nation-state, a few major elements must be
mentioned. First, one school of democratic thought views the current nation-state as the primary
analytical framework. The state should be transcended, according to the second school of
democratic thought. The state is largely disregarded or disregarded entirely by the third school of
democratic ideology. The fourth school of democratic thought contends that revitalizing the state
as a site of democratic action is both feasible and desirable.
Evaluation
The use of democracy varies across cultures and over history. As a result of globalization, the
governance process has undergone a significant change. Currently, there is a conflict between
democracy and globalization. Both have various flaws that are inherent. There are indications
that Democracy is threatened by Globalization as it is a factor that has increased inequality,
insecurity, and interdependence, which all are major drivers of stress (Milner, 2021). Because if
one country's economy starts to struggle, this can start a chain reaction that can affect many other
countries at once, triggering a global financial crisis, and the probability of a global recession
rises drastically as more and more country’s economic systems become interdependent(Russia-
Ukraine war for instance). These are usually unsettling indications of a reaction against
globalization elsewhere, in democratic nations. They are not mistaken, but they fail to recognize
that globalization and democracy can only work together when the benefits of globalization are
widely distributed and the political system is set up to facilitate this.
However, there are signs that democracy and globalization are not always incompatible, though.
Some contend that democracy and globalization go hand in hand, saying that enhanced
government accountability and transparency result from unrestrained global trade. As in the
study of Hagfors (2021), The thesis's main finding is that existing democracies appear to benefit
from de jure trade globalization in terms of the quality of their democracies. The benefits of
globalization and technological advancement are very similar. They have very similar outcomes:
they boost national output, and productivity, increase employment, improve wages, and cut
global product prices. The fact that international trade, for instance, brings down the cost of
consumer products is something I believe is underappreciated. So if you consider the regular
items you buy, such as washing machines, vehicles, or even clothing, you will see that prices
have decreased as a result of global trade, making these items far more accessible to a greater
number of people throughout the world.
Conclusion
The fundamental idea of democracy was examined in this work, which illustrates how neoliberal
state capacity transformation and international governance frameworks obstruct democratic
practices and popular choice within the state. It is vital to comprehend how political leadership
has demanded and changed the state as a result of neoliberal globalization and global capitalism's
financialization. They must also take into account the emergence of international systems of
governance and civil society networks. This is a challenging task since, in the modern world, the
rule of law is a contested topic in both scholarly and public debate. Significant policy and
intellectual debate have centered on how democracy and globalization interact. Today, a wide
variety of global and transnational processes affect or are influenced by people all over the
world, from business dealings on international financial markets to online cultural exchanges.
However, it is also true that these practices' scope and effects are noticeably unequal; while some
people are not allowed to gain from globalization, others have significant difficulties and
disadvantages as a result of their involvement in powerful international networks. As a result, the
idea that there is little to no democratic control over new centers of power and authority that go
outside the nation-state has fueled public opposition to current globalization.

References:
Helen V Milner, Is Global Capitalism Compatible with Democracy? Inequality, Insecurity, and
Interdependence, International Studies Quarterly, Volume 65, Issue 4, December 2021, Pages
1097–1110, https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqab056
Hagfors, Sara Bjønness, (2021). Globalisation and democracy - friends or foes? Examining the
effects of economic globalization on the quality of democracy in established democracies.
https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2771062