Wednesday, December 6, 2017

Regional Identity, Global Economics, and the Modern State by Zachary Henry

Globalization is a concept that is taking over modern international relations. It has brought about a global sense of movement and interconnectedness, especially in economics and communication. It has brought about themes of a “global citizen” and a picturesque version of earth as one whole political or societal space. But at its core, it strengthens the idea of regional rule and can explain why many areas around the world are clamoring for independence. Globalization is a major player in transcending national identities, endorsing regional independence through political identity and economics, therefore, it pushes states to transcend their nationalist identities.
Catalonia is an area in Northeast Spain that has recently had much rioting and protests to cede from Spain. They held a referendum to cede at the beginning of October this year, which was reportedly an overwhelming ceding vote. This event represents a more violent version of what has also been happening in other corners of Europe—Flanders in Belgium, and Scotland in the United Kingdom. These regional areas are being affected greatly by globalization. Due to globalization, the national identity that the mother states were legitimized on are starting to crumble. Globalization brings about an ease of movement of people, culture, and communications. Because of this ease of movement, people tend to cling onto their regional, local values as a response to a seemingly global socioeconomic identity that is forming. Pluralism creates a rift of nationalism into global identity and its regional response, both of which are now essential for a state to embrace. The state’s role to protect a nationalist idea and people is no longer valid, because the power of a regional identity and global outlook has eclipsed the nationalism they protect. They essentially are no longer the central hub of security in their citizens lives, as the social contract of government calls for.
The ease of movement also applies to economics. Economics is a truly a concept with global foundations that is catalyzed by globalization. The importance of economics and trade in the global era to the state cannot be understated. Therefore, they must at least attempt to participate on the global stage in trade or finance. Globalization has facilitated a world economic boom. Trade has increase exponentially, and GDPs have been steadily rising. States must consider some form of differentiation to allow for global participation with the current dominating regional trends. The cling to regional customs is further reinforced by the economic policies of globalism. When global business ventures bring their culture into foreign markets, they disrupt the usual socioeconomic atmosphere. An example of this would be having a McDonalds in the middle of an Italian city that seems to reverberate culture and history even just in the architecture. This process proceeds to further reinforce the need to hold onto local customs and values.
States need to escape the rigid bounds of nationalism that contain them. They need to adapt to a new globalized identity that will allow them to survive. They must transcend the conventional definitions of nationalism and globalism to legitimize the shifting identities of their citizens, or risk the failure of their state. The state is not disappearing entirely, it just must adapt to the new political atmosphere, just as it has previously in history, like with the dissolution of world empires to nationalism.

outside reading sources:


2 comments:

  1. Zach, I found this post both insightful and interesting! Your argument is convincing and well written. Like you say, states are no longer able to protect their own identity because of globalization, specifically pluralism and economics. I too believe a solution to this is involves transcending the traditional definitions of nationalism and globalism. If a state was able to transcend these definitions, what would the outcome look like? For example, would the McDonalds in a historic Italian city be designed to better match the architecture of the city? Or would the city modernize more of itself to match the modern companies brought in by globalization (McDonalds)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great, question Liz. I think that the McDonalds would be architecturally made to fit in with the local culture of the city. With that being said, in a more international sense, a state that transcends these limitations may end up looking more like a city-state, where an immense amount of power would reside moreso in the cities, where local traditions and economic globalism seem to mend well.

      Delete

The Game of Risk

         In our International Politics class, we played the game “Risk.” I was a member of the black team. Described as a peace-loving “midd...