Introduction and relevance of the topic in today’s world.
Democratisation ideas sweep across the borders even in the most authoritarian states. Through the development in technology, especially IT, and the development of travel means asserting the grater flow of people - the spread of new ideas becomes inevitable. Though the current trends cannot insure the strong link between globalization and democracy. Lets take an example of Singapore which at the A.T. Kearny/Foreign Policy magazine Globalization Index is ranked the highest, reaching the top levels of cross-border contacts between people . However it has semi-authoritarian regime and aver the last 3 decades hardly shows any signs of further democratization. So, the research question is
…show more content…
Many members of the ruling elites of the Arab governments publicly accused the channel of fuelling protests and shaking the current regimes, seeing Al-Jazeera as their main enemy . Since its launching in 1996 the channel played an important role in shaping peoples opinions and can be viewed as the most influential news agent in the region. TV channel has its 65th correspondent offices worldwide and in 2013 invested about $ 500 million in the development of its network in the United States to further increase the audience . However their broadcasts were blocked, offices attacked and its correspondents black-listed or even arrested and harassed. Al-Jazeera with some help from NATO succeeded in overthrowing Gaddafi clan, who ruled Libya using fear, death squads, murders , unexplained disappearances and torture of opponents - exclaims journalist Ismail Nehad, noting that coverage of the Arab Spring was solid and professional. The next mission of Al-Jazeera was to have the same influence in Syrian case and to bring down Syrian tyrant Bashar al Assad . In this case we can claim that the channel took a side of people against the dictators. Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya were described as contemptible dogs by Gaddafi and Bashar al Assad.
On the other hand, a number of top television journalists left their jobs, explaining that the channel is
…show more content…
Al-Jazeera was the media earthquake that opened the gates of freedom of expression and democracy. Since its founding in 1996, the channel was the only Arab media source that regularly invited of Israeli politicians to participate in discussions . His correspondents, unlike their counterparts in other Arab media, allowed themselves to call Saddam Hussein a dictator, and talk about dissidents in the Arab countries , such as the Muslim Brotherhood in
The article named “spring awakening” wrote by Jose Vargas describes the impact of social media in converting the mentality of young Egyptian generations into bold and defend their inalienable rights as a citizen. This article justifies how social media can mobilize a tremendous number of people to stand up for their rights. The reasons that inspire my emotion is emerging of “Wael Ghonim” as a legendary vocal figure of action for change, revelation of social media as earthquake for change, and fundamental soci-political change.
“Globalization contributes to sustainable prosperity for all people”. This quote contains mostly truth but there are also many arguments towards how globalization really does contribute to sustainable prosperity for people all around the world. This can be supported by three main points. How the rise of Japan’s economy effected the lives of millions of people. How shipwrecking effects the lives of both the ship companies and the workers in Bangladesh, and how economic growth contributes to the sustainable prosperity of the population in a specific nation. Sustainable prosperity can be defined differently from different individuals because of people’s personal opinions and their perspective is also effected by the people who influence their lives the most, but the main definition of prosperity is to have good fortune, or growth in an economic way. Globalization creates a gateway for sustainable prosperity to all people and gives people all around the world the opportunity to gain prosperity.
However, books and newspapers are not our sole source of the written word. Online blogs, articles, and newsletters now exist. Television and books have merged into one: the Internet. Revolutions, riots, and rebellions don’t just happen in our living rooms now, they happen on the go with us. On the subway, when we’re waiting in line at Subway, at our friend’s house as he talks about how he’s “way into subs.”
The authoritarian regimes of the Middles cycled through a pattern of anti-western policy until the globalization effects of economics and information demanded reform. As conservative Arab states try to maintain the autocracy they relied on after gaining independence, their citizens, affected by information and education expansion, challenge their resistant governments as typified by Syria’s unwillingness to capitulate. The proliferation of information and education underscored the protest movements of the Arab Spring because citizens’ contempt for their obstinate governments grew to large under economic pressures, as the current situation in Syria demonstrates.
Although it already existed long before through primitive trade and migration, globalization has become a major factor in the world organization since the twentieth century. With the creation of transnational companies, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, political and economic associations appeared new powerful actors that cannot be left apart in states’ decisions and whose influence may, according to some, threaten the authority of nation-states. Indeed it can be thought that globalization is causing the end of borders between countries and what is more that it is creating a sort of universal society in which states’ sovereignty is not the main authority anymore. However this essay will try to demonstrate that globalization is not undermining state sovereignty but that it is in fact leading to its transformation and to a new variety of nations. In order to prove it I will first define the main key words and will then focus on the different arguments about the effects of globalization and finally I will demonstrate that globalization has led to a transformation of the concept of state sovereignty.
... result of a direct democracy, complications like getting every citizen to vote on every single issue, something close to impossible with modern populations that grow like grass in springtime. These changes have caused democracy to become intertwined with other forms of government, and while they have caused a deviation from pure democracy, they have allowed countless nations to function efficiently while maintaining the basic pillar of democracy: that ultimate authority and power is derived from the citizens.
There have been enormous efforts to spread democracy as a political system throughout the world by the developed democratic countries and the international development organizations including the World Bank. By the late 1990s the United States alone spent over a half billion dollars to promote democratic expansion throughout the world (Diamond, 2003). These were done considering that the democratic system leads towards development. As a result in the late 20th century we saw a huge political transformation towards democracy. During the last few decades a huge number of countries adopted democracy as their political system. However, it retain a big question how far democracy is successful in bringing development of a country? At this stage, some people also criticizes the effort of democratization arguing that it is done without considering the context of a country, sometimes democracy is not ideal for all countries and it is an effort to extinct diversity of political system. In studying the literature regarding the debate, we found a paradoxical relationship between democracy and development. Some argue that democracy has failed to ensure expected outcomes in terms of development. While others confronted that democracy has a considerable impact on development. Another group of people argue that form of political system actually does not have any impact on development process. On the verge of these debates, some development institutions and academics throw light on why democracy is not working properly, and what measure should be taken to make it more successful in bringing effective development of developing countries. Consequently, this writing is an effort of revisiting the different views about impact of democra...
Media has always had the power to transform ideas through what it represents. Most of the media we experience today is part of a global message which we absorb into our everyday lives; our customs, cultural coding, religious views and political standings. Due to satellite televesion, nations everywhere are able to tune into the world on a larger scale putting each nation under a single umbrella of opinions and views e...
Firstly, K. Isbester mentions that democracy has a different meaning for everyone, as some can define democracy as a good aspect for development, on the contrary other believe that it is nothing more than voting after several years. Although, Latin America see democratic g...
There for we say yes, media can have a sizeable political impact, especially when a politician controls a substantial share of the media. Media is therefore bad for democracy. Stated throughout this paper is the level of bias that is displayed in the media. This level of bias sways the public far right or far left. Their decisions are based on a political point of view.
One of the fundamental roles of the media in a liberal democracy is to critically scrutinise governmental affairs: that is to act as a watchdog of government to ensure that the government can be held accountable by the public. However, the systematic deregulation of media systems worldwide is diminishing the ability of citizens to meaningfully participate in policymaking process governing the media (McChesney, 2003, p. 126). The relaxation of ownership rules and control, has resulted in a move away from diversity of production to a situation where media ownership is becoming increasing concentrated by just a few predominantly western global conglomerates (M...
Globalization is an overwhelming trend. It is no doubt that there are many positives rise out of globalization, but equally some serious negatives brought from this trend, such as gradual disappearance of ethnic identity (Buckley, 1998). This essay is going to address some positive effects of globalization generally, and then it will focus on impacts of this trend on developing countries.
The link between internationalization, governance and democracy is a central problem for politics as well as for political science. Even if clear evidence on the nature of this link is not yet available, the literature seems to support the view that internationalization both undermines the capacity for governance and puts into question traditional forms of democracy.
Proponents have a strong belief in free markets and limited governments intervention. According to Preble (2010), globalization has led to the creation of jobs, higher living standards and a higher variety of goods available to consumers. International trade is one of the driving forces behind globalization. Countries specialize in specific goods wherein it has a comparative advantage. This results in a higher efficiency and productivity and ultimately leading to an improvement of the living standards. As a consequence, export increases. Hereto, more jobs are created, a higher variety of goods are available and international competition has increased. This results in lower prices, keeping the inflation in check (Preble, 2010). Furthermore, Preble (2010) states that the increase of trade in goods and services, foreign direct investment and cross-border investment have been important for the success of globalization. Other important benefits, mentioned by the proponents of globalization, are the promotion of information exchange and high understanding of a variety of cultures. Globalization has led to a world where “democracy has triumph over autocracy” (BBC News, 2000, as stated in Preble, 2010, p. 334).
There is an undeniable fact that there has been a rise in globalization. It has become a hot topic amongst the field of international politics. With the rise of globalization, the sovereignty of the state is now being undermined. It has become an undisputed fact that the world has evolved to a new level of globalization, the transferring goods, information, ideas and services around the globe has changed at an unimaginable rate. With all that is going on, one would question how globalization has changed the system that is typically a collection of sovereign states. Do states still have the main source of power? What gives a state the right to rule a geographically defined region? It is believed by many that due to the introduction of international systems and increasing rate of globalization, the sovereignty of the state has been slowly eroded over time. My paper has two parts: First, it aims to take a close look at how globalization has changed the way the economy worked, specifically how it opened doors for multinational corporations to rise in power. Second, to answer the question, is it possible for it to exist today? And even so, should it?