DECEMBER
JOURNAL 2002
OF MACROMARKETING
REVIEWS
WHAT IS GLOBALIZATION?
Ulrich Beck
Patrick Camiller (Translator)
Polity Press: Cambridge, UK
DOI: 10.1177/0276146702238221
Ulrich Beck argues here that globalization has transformed
the old categories of political action away from the national
state. This transformation is possible because the multina-
tional corporation has recaptured the power it lost in the
development of democratic capitalism and the welfare state.
This is made possible by its ability to withhold material
resources from the state. Thus, they can change not only the
economy of a nation but society itself. Globalization policies,
he argues, are intended to sever the power of both trade unions
and the state itself. The “final aim” of such policies is to dis-
mantle the state to achieve the “market utopia” of the minimal
state, which is the implementation of the ideology of
neoliberalism.
The power to achieve the above is created by the transna-
tional corporations’ (TNCs) ability to export jobs from unco-
operative states, to develop a global division of labor, and to
play countries off against one another. This leads to the devel-
opment of “subpolitics” in which the TNC has power beyond
established political systems. Thus, in the new modernity,
politics recedes before the expansion of the economic realm.
Globalization undermines the nation-state because its effects
cut across traditional boundaries. Ironically, as politicians
court the TNC with incentives, they undermine their own
political authority and the public good. Rather than enhancing
social justice as the rhetoric of globalization suggests, global-
ization increases injustice even further. The framework for
balancing the conflicts between rich and poor no longer exist
at the time when the gulf between them is widening at alarm-
ing rates. Thus, Beck concludes that neoliberals who present
themselves as the reformers of the West are ultimately its
destroyers.
Beck distinguishes between globalism, globality, and
globalization. Globalism is the ideology of neoliberalism,
which demands rule by the world market. It effectively
negates the political, resulting in complete economic
reductionism. Globality suggests a world society in which
closed spaces of the past have become illusory. Rather, social
relationships are not determined by national state politics. Its
essence is “multiplicity without unity.” Finally, globalization
denotes the processes by which the nation-state is undermined
by transnational actors. He argues within this framework that
globality in the new modernity is irreversible for a number of
reasons. Among these are density of international trade, the
182
revolution in information technology, the global culture
industry, and growing power of transnational actors to name a
few. Unlike global homogenization theorists, world society is
conceived here as multiplicity and nonintegration. It also
means no world state or world society without a world state or
world government. Globalization thus leads to “globally dis-
organized capitalism” unconstrained by external control.
Noting that the discourse of globalization is fuzzy at best,
Beck argues that there are multiple dimensions of globaliza-
tion that need to be considered. These include information,
ecological, economic, production, and cultural globalization.
Within these contexts, the fundamental premise of modernity
has been that the various contours of society coincide with
national borders. It is within the context of globality that the
identification of society with the state is becoming less mean-
ingful. It is thus a negation of the “container theory of society”
that has informed social theory to date and made the
nation-state the unit of analysis. How this has played out in
various theories is demonstrated by an examination of several
prevalent approaches to globalization. The progress of global-
ization is characterized as a somewhat dialectical process
between the nation-state and the transnational corporation. In
consideration of transnational civil society, Beck suggests
that new transnational spaces open for transnational actors
who have no legitimate power.
Several theorists are examined. These range from
Wallerstein’s (1979) world system that suggests that the
global logic of capitalism dominates the process, to Gilpin
and Gilpin (2000), who argue that the development of trans-
national social spaces requires a permissive political structure
making globalization contingent. Beck then offers his own
“world risk society” based on global ecological risks that
know no boundaries. He sees a new cosmopolitan conscious-
ness predicated on the notion that global threats create global
society. Here the TNC is not a direct agent of change as it is in
other approaches. It is tied indirectly, however, in the conse-
quences of its actions caused by both affluence and poverty.
Such global risks bring involuntary politicization. The cul-
tural transformations of globalization that might be summed
in the “McDonaldization” thesis are disputed because they
suggest a one-dimensional process. Globalization actually
gives new meaning to the idea of the local as narrowly geo-
graphic because, for example, there can be no global produc-
tion but only multiple local productions. He refers to this pro-
cess as translocal or occurring in several places at one time.
Within the translocal view, he refers to different types of dis-
tinction as exclusive or inclusive. In the former, one is a mem-
ber of one group or another depending on the side of the
Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 22 No. 2, December 2002 182-204
© 2002 Sage Publications

border from which they come, and the groups are mutually
exclusive. This view is predicated on the traditional container
theory of society. With inclusive distinctions, one is between
the groups or in both, as with multiple concentric circles in
which one is a member of all simultaneously. Globalization
cancels exclusive distinction, replacing it with conformity to
a single cultural model. With inclusion, however, globaliza-
tion and localization are two sides of the same coin. For
Bauman (1998), however, maldistribution of wealth puts the
rich on one side of the coin and the poor on the other.
In the context of wealth then, globalization is deceiving
because there are winners and losers. Global capitalism can
be characterized as creating growth while reducing employ-
ment. In doing so, it abrogates its responsibility and, conse-
quently, undermines its legitimacy. Unlike the past, economic
growth and increased profitability do not reduce unemploy-
ment in the global economy. The basis for citizenship in the
past was paid labor, but with the demise of this relationship,
Beck argues that both freedom and democracy are at risk.
TRANSNATIONAL CIVIL SOCIETY
With the collapse of state social spaces, new opportunities
for political action can arise. This deprives the old state of the
power to shape its society. TNCs and other organizations fill
the space and play off states against one another with their
ability to grant or withhold resources. The global culture
industry is instrumental in the process by proffering images
across cultural boundaries. Thus, cultural development is no
longer local but translocal and can be thought of as cultures
rather than culture. This transforms the geography to one of
supranational and subnational regionalisms. Consequently,
there is not one France but many and not one Europe. In the
process, new forms of political action can arise. The boycott,
for example, when successful, transfers power to the con-
sumer in the creation of the political consumer. However, this
presupposes antecedent conditions. One must have purchas-
ing power to be effective. Furthermore, there must be some
form of moral outcry, political opportunity, and simple alter-
natives. While there are instances in which this combination
of conditions have existed, Beck does not provide us with any
but the few obvious cases. Numerous small voices may alter
the political contours, but it is problematic just how likely this
is to become a common mode of action in the global
marketplace.
From the personal standpoint, Beck suggests the possibil-
ity of place polygamy. By this he means a marriage to several
places at once. But the places must represent different worlds.
When this happens, the association of place with society
breaks down. This is referred to as the globalization of biogra-
phy. But does this constitute global civil society? It seems that
world civil society exists to the extent it is perceived as such.
With the experience of world civil society arises the prospect
for cosmopolitan democracy if basic rights are applicable
JOURNAL OF MACROMARKETING 183
transnationally. The paradox of cosmopolitan democracy is
that individual rights presuppose a state to grant those rights.
But cosmopolitanism requires cooperation between states,
which then restricts the rights of other states when there is no
world state to take the place of national states. This paradox is
not resolved here. Thus, the primacy of the nation-state is
challenged by cosmopolitan democracy, but it is difficult to
envision such a condition without transnational institutions.
Among these are a balance of power between nations, princi-
ples of cosmopolitan democratic laws, a transnational legal
system, the transfer of some state power to transnational insti-
tutions, and public money to enable the exercise of political
freedom. These ideals become uncertain when one considers
the economic power relations within economic globalization.
This then requires a number of conditions for its success,
many of which are lacking.
In Beck’s risk society, institutions will change in response
to global risks, particularly ecological risks. Before large-
scale technological actions are taken, debate ensues before
the introduction, not after. This, he argues, shifts the focus
from the present to the future rather than the past. This would
require an equivalent of a second Enlightenment, that is, a
new paradigm. The process would be set in motion by the per-
ception of greater and greater dangers. However, this too
requires a number of background assumptions that Beck does
not provide.
World society means a nonstate society rather than a single
state. This involves the erosion of state institutions and their
premises. World politics implies the depoliticization of the
nation-states. Because it is stateless, it is also without order
and without institutions. It is where technology, culture, capi-
tal, and politics merge beyond the control of states. For such a
state to emerge, it would require cooperation between exist-
ing states to create a cosmopolitan community of states inter-
acting politically and conscious of their cosmopolitanism.
Furthermore, it is nonnational states in the traditional sense
that make up a state that recognizes globality as a reality and
focuses on the transnational to revitalize politics and achieves
this through transnational cooperation. The traditional defini-
tions equating state and society and territorial associations
are removed from the discourse of the transnational state.
Within irreversible globality we find world society with-
out a world state or world government. Within this system,
the neoliberal ideology must be exposed as antiquated
economism pretending to be apolitical. Beck suggests that
there are ten errors of globalism: (1) economic reductionism
or the view that world society is a world market society, (2)
free world trade is an illusion and certainly not to everyone’s
benefit, (3) globalization is not simply internationalization of
the economy, (4) fear is created by the allusion to threats to
the less powerful, (5) everything and everyone must be subor-
dinated to the economic, (6) the cultural convergence thesis is
faulty, (7) catastrophe is not necessarily imminent, (8)
neoliberal strategies of globalism are self-contradictory, (9)
184 DECEMBER 2002
green protectionism can be counterproductive when it con-
flicts with the globality of the ecological crisis, and (10) the
protection of the welfare state from changes.
The ultimate question for Beck is how responsible global-
ization can be effected. It involves first a radical critique of the
neoliberal ideology of globalism. He begins with interna-
tional cooperation in keeping the TNCs under control. Also, a
new definition of the relationship between state, business,
and society must be established. Transnational states are cre-
ated by alliances to develop regional sovereignty beyond the
individual states. Thus, to increase their capacity to control,
they must give up some individual power. Joint ownership of
capital with workers sharing in ownership provides an anti-
dote for increasing unemployment. This can be supple-
mented by education policies that create a knowledge society
commensurate with global capital. Capital must be tied to
place and then to products. This avoids capital flight and
superfluous production. In addition, the politicization of con-
sumption to constrain corporations would be an integral part
of control. To compensate for decreasing industrial employ-
ment, new value in civil labor should be developed. He also
argues for increased self-employment and an elimination of
exclusion, particularly for income reasons.
Globalism is irreversible through the efforts of any state,
but a transnational structure as large a Europe might offer an
opportunity to restore politics. This enables a reregulation of
transnational business and an implementation of social and
ecological policies. Balanced trade would then minimize the
degree to which fewer and fewer get richer and richer while
the majority foot the bill.
It is clear from Beck’s sociological perspective that glob-
alization is more than the internationalization of business.
The book presents his perspective, which differs from the typ-
ical business approach to globalization. While it is hard to fol-
low at times, appearing to be a collection of short pieces inte-
grated into a book, it is well worth the effort of working
through it. It is of particular interest to the macromarketing
world because of the unique sociological perspective focus-
ing on institutional change immanent in globalization. The
book would be a good supplement in any graduate-level mul-
tinational marketing class but would be a bit daunting for
undergraduates. It should be required reading for anyone who
teaches in the international area as it would provide new
dimensions and an alternative way of thinking about the glob-
alization process including as it does, the political, cultural,
and social dimensions of the process that marketing generally
plays down or ignores. In combination with others, such as
Giddens (1998), Wallerstein (1979), or Held (1995), the
macro nature of the globalization process is inescapable as is
the neoliberal philosophy that drives it in the quest to reduce
the political and cultural to the logic of the world market.
REFERENCES
Bauman, Zygmut. 1998. Globalization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Giddens, Anthony. 1998. The third way: The renewal of social democracy.
Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Gilpin, Robert, and Jean Gilpin. 2000. The challenge of global capitalism.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Held, David. 1995. Democracy and the global order. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1979. The capitalist world-economy. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
William E. Kilbourne
Sam Houston State University
DECEMBER
JOURNAL 2002
OF MACROMARKETING
TRANSITION, THE FIRST TEN YEARS: ANALYSIS
AND LESSONS FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND
THE FORMER SOVIET UNION
The World Bank
Washington, DC, 2002
DOI: 10.1177/0276146702238222
While available online as well as a bound book, this vol-
ume is far more than just another World Bank report or work-
ing paper. As the title says, it is the World Bank’s attempt to
summarize what we have learned from the transition efforts
from communism to market economies, and in some cases to
representative governments, in the countries of Central
Europe, Southeastern Europe, the Baltic (combined and
referred to as CSB), and the former Soviet Union’s Common-
wealth of Independent States (CIS). After a start at transition,
some of these states fell into traps that have prevented them
from continuing to make progress. As a result, it seems clear
that five years was not enough time to determine what princi-
ples can be gleaned from this experience. Ten years seem to
provide just the right amount of perspective, at least in this
part of the world.
This volume is not the only endeavor at summarizing the
transition experience in this part of the world, nor will it be the
last (see Warner 2002). The European Bank for Reconstruc-
tion and Development (EBRD) published their ten-year
report in their 1999 Transition Report. Since statistics lag one
year, the EBRD 2000 Transition Report merits attention as
well. The EBRD reports contain more statistical data than the
World Bank’s effort, and some statistics reported below are
from that source. After 124 pages of analysis, the EBRD pro-
vides a detailed assessment with very complete statistical
data for each of twenty-six countries. The World Bank’s anal-
ysis comes across a bit more like a sermon. That remark is not
intended to be pejorative. Many World Bank critics accuse