The uncertainty of the nation-state's continued viability in light of the many effects of globalization has led to a large amount of dialogue on the subject. In particular, aspects of the global economy are frequently referenced to when discussing possible decreases in power. Some of the primary trends are increased levels of FDI, the growing amount of production lines that cross borders, influences of technology and the internet, and increasingly global flows of labor. These have certainly made it difficult for the nation-state to retain power over its domestic policies. In many instances, the power of the nation-state has ever increasing constraints being placed on it. In some cases, but not all, this leads to a weakening of state power as an economic choice becomes unavailable, such as regulating FDI on the internet. There are also cases in which the nation-state changes without necessarily loosing power, such as the turn towards credible treats and the prominence of non-state actors. There is also a strong possibility that globalization's economic effects influence different areas to different degrees. Within the developed world, the increasing integration can strengthen some nation-states as it weakens others. In the case of the global south, it's possible that by missing out on many economic benefits of globalization they are simultaneously being excluded from it's repercussions for state power. On the other hand, the level of nation-state power in these countries is skewed. It's hard to say whether a nation-state in sub-saharan Africa is losing economic power or it simply never had it in the first place. This paper will focus on the negative implications of the state's economic power form the limiting qualities ...
... middle of paper ...
...does not strongly endanger the nation-state, and in some cases may make a few states stronger, the tables will turn quickly the nation-state will not be able to adapt quickly enough without sacrificing further power or sovereignty. There are also implications for the nation-states ability to govern in light of globalization and its integration. In the realm of sovereignty, there has been and will continue to be a rise in the prominence of non-state actors and previously non-important states. With non-state actors, the weakening of the state is not guaranteed, while the rise of developing countries does at least provide for a lessening of the power differential. Essentially, the potential for the weakening of the nation-state is very strong economically and probable politically, but a great deal remains to influence this process that open up both possibilities.
Since the 15th century the world has been through three major power shifting, as Fareed Zakaria describe in his book “The Post-American World”. Zakaria analyze that the first power shifting began in the 15th century and took place in most of European countries, this was the era of the development of modern science and technology, it is also produced such a long history of political dominance of the nations of the west. . The second shift was the rise of the United States in end of 19th century, right after it industrialized the United States emerged as the most developed and strongest country in the world, and for the last century the United States has dominated the global economics, politics, sciences and cultures. What we are facing right
...). Therefore, if liberty rights and rights to goods and services are violated in various states, then how can Nussbaum expect to see the central capabilities guaranteed in such states? Another negative aspect about placing obligations or establishing guarantees from states is that some may lack the power to fulfill those obligations (O’Neill 435) For example, underdeveloped states or the deemed failed states lack the economic resources and political stability to do so. Others don’t necessarily need to be in a similar situation for failing as duty-bearers. States regarded as being strong in the international community may encounter enforcement problems. Even so when they cannot guarantee liberty rights to their constituents as do many authoritarian regimes. As a result, O’Neill suggests reconsidering whether all second-order obligations should be assigned to states.
It is thought-provoking, in the sense that Africa’s need for foreign created a race to the bottom, much like what Pietra Rivoli described in The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy. Due to some African states’ reliance on foreign aid in order to mine and profit on their resources, they allow business standards to be lowered and for Chinese firms to tip the contracts moresoever in the favor of Chinese firms. This lowers the potential earnings of African states by lowering royalty rates, for example. Additionally, Burgis’ research was thorough and transparent. When he did not receive a response or if his questions were dodged, he made it obvious to the readers. Sure, some could view this book as too anecdotal to be used as a credible source of Africa’s situation. However, this is due to the nature of the system Burgis is writing about; after all, they are shadow states for a reason. Some readers will be saddened by this text, others angry, most curious to learn more, but above all, everyone will be intellectually stimulated and
The definition of nationalism, according to Anderson, is an “imagined impersonal community, defined by common history and perceived by distinctiveness, that is believed to exercise the collective right to sovereign control over a given territory.” Over the last 200 years, the United States has grown larger and stronger with every change, and with that, the understanding of nationhood and nationalism in the US has changed within the constraints of this definition. In the beginning, nationhood was very different. It was elite driven. The united states was built on immigrants brought together with the idea of building a free nation. This could be described by the elite theory, which states that elites are aspiring to nationalism and lead the movements.
Nationalism has played a crucial role in world history over the past centuries. It continues to do so today. For many, nationalism is indelibly associated with some of the worst aspects of modern history, such as the destructive confidence of the Napoleon’s army and the murderous pride of Nazi Germany. Large numbers of people, descent in their hearts, have carried out unbelievable atrocities for no better reason than their nation required them to. Authoritarian and totalitarian regime have crushed dissent, eliminated opposition, and trampled on civil liberties in the name of the nation.
Why do nations fail? This is a topic of popular debate with many economists and a question many scholars have struggled to find an answer to. Global poverty is an issue that economists Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson investigate and provide an alternative insight for in their book: ‘Why Nations Fail’. Acemoglu and Robinson investigate inequalities that exist across countries and why nations are an epitome of success and others, failure. They come up with an alternative explanation for why standards of living differ across countries, and why a gap exists between the rich and poor. The book introduces an example of two cities that are separated by a border: Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Sonora. On the American side of the border, the income of the average household is $30,000, the population is relatively healthy, and the citizens live prosperously (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012). On the opposite side of the border in Mexico, majority of the population do not own a high school degree, poor health conditions exist, poor infrastructure and unfortunately, high infant mortality rates (Acemoglu & Robinson 2012). How can situations on opposite borders be so different? The basis for Acemoglu and Robison’ s thesis for this phenomenon is that of institutions. They propose that that there is a strong correlation between economic and political institutions. That is, inclusive political institutions support inclusive economic institutions, and extractive political institutions support extractive economic institutions (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012). Democratic institutions generally allow opportunities for the majority, leading to positive economic growth. Political institutions that look after a narrow elite is reinforced with stag...
This essay will describe the characteristics of the modern nation-state, explain how the United States fits the criteria of and functions as a modern nation-state, discuss the European Union as a transnational entity, analyze how nation-states and transnational entities engage on foreign policy to achieve their interests, and the consequences of this interaction for international politics.
Globalization and the increasing role of non-state actors have shifted the position of states, the traditional “main players” in global governance. However, whether this change undermines states is debatable. In one sense, states’ roles have somewhat diminished: Non-governmental entities – namely transnational corporations (TNC), but also global non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and others – have an increasing voice in global policy debates, which may lessen states’ influence in governmental affairs. But in several other key ways, states’ retain their powerful role. For example, states remain the key negotiators and entities in major global governance entities. Additionally, states retain compulsory power over their subjects or constituents, a form of control that new players in global governments have generally not obtained.
Since the earliest recorded history, there has always been one elusive title that a State has strived for, the title of Super Power. Power is one of the fundamental characteristics of the international system and the distribution of power among states. It is obvious that states are unequal in power and this “entails a number of important implications for international politics”. As a result of this lack of power, the ‘weak states’ desires and concerns are often neglected and the ‘strong states’ demands usually shape the international agenda. In the Modern Society, some would argue that we have two great powers in Russia and the United States, but if you measure and compare the two countries, The United States is more powerful. Some of these categories are population in which the U.S has more than double Russ...
Just imagine waking up in squalor, a once prominent society, now a desolate wasteland. All because foreign interest has raped your land of its natural resources and you seen not a cent in profit. Although, globalization is unifying the worlds developed nations and is bringing commerce to nations that have struggle in past years. True, globalization has many positive effects but do the pros outweigh the cons. In this essay I will discuss Globalization ruining the integrity of many countries and also is forcing many undeveloped nations into a bind, and is causing economic distress on some developed nations. Also, due to economic globalization the nations of the world are diluting their culture, sovereignty, natural resources, safety and political system. My goal is not to change your way of thought, but only to enlighten you of the negatives of global economic expansion.
While some may argue that a state-centric international system is apt for non-state actors, since to attain a foreseeable future, they need to comprehend the state system and how to operate within it. This structure is weakening as non-state actors are increasing their influence in conflicts and challenging the international order founded upon the power of states. The openness of commercial markets and the weakening territorial sovereignty has limited the state’s monopoly of power asserted by structural realists. In Structural Realism After the Cold War, Kenneth Waltz alleges that, “If the conditions that a theory contemplated have changed, the theory no longer applies.” Theories and traditions in international relations must become more comprehensive if society intends to tackle the conflicts of the 21st century more effectively in the future.
...tries. These ideas were discussed in lecture on February 16th, 2011, as well as explored in Manfred B. Steger's, Globalization: A Very Short Introduction, and I.B. Logan and Kidane Mengisteab's article, "IMF – World Bank Adjustment and Structural Transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa." Instead of globalization as a positive system for SSA, it did the opposite, and made the region stagnant in economic terms. It was about expanding relationships among countries, but adjustments were creating barriers that prevented SSA from economic communications with other countries. Therefore, it contributed to colonialism after World War II; colonial powers were able to indirectly control what SSA could do, and whom they were able to contact. The World Bank as a financial institution affected SSA's economic industry, and was partly responsible for the control colonial powers had.
"The nation-state system has proven to be an enormously successful construct" (Smallman and Brown 37). Nation-states being when its citizens think similarly and live harmoniously under one government. "Security was defined in terms of the survival of the nation-state, and its ability to maintain its sovereignty" (Smallman and Brown 37). Basically, nations deserve to keep the authority and power to lead itself. In a democracy, the citizens of the nation are able to make more decisions for the nation. For example, when voting on who will lead the nation, voters are able to take into account many different aspects of the candidates. Citizens are then by an extent able to decide things along the lines of whether to engage or not engage in war. This is an example to how politics impact state security. This is important because "the first task of every government is to ensure the security of its citizens from outside threats" (Smallman and Brown 36). This is why an enforcement of peace by the United Nations is ideal because the fact is that "at the current mo...
Why Nations Fail takes an in depth look into why some countries flourish and become rich powerful nations while other countries are left in or reduced to poverty. Throughout this book review I will discuss major arguments and theories used by the authors and how they directly impact international development, keeping in mind that nations are only as strong as their political and economical systems.
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?