Question 3(a) · 501 words written
Discuss the changing nature of the nation-state in the context of globalisation.
Opening
'Globalisation' is the modern world phenomena in which a nation-state is integrated to global economy, society & polity as a whole. It has engulfed the whole world which appear as a single unit. One incident in certain part of world has its visible effect on other due to globalisation itself.
Body
- Globalisation & its effect is currently gaining importance in sociological discourse & political-sociologists have thrown light on the ramifications of globalisation on society & nation-state especially.
- Ohmae advocates: Globalisation has shifted the power from state to consumers. It's no longer in the hands of nation-states to rule over the choices of its population. Rather, consumers can buy anything from anywhere without intervention of state.
- Sklair rather suggests it's not consumers rather transnational companies (TNCs) which have gained advantage to the fullest. TNCs having its global exposure has taken away the power of states to dictate over the taste & preferences of masses. National boundaries are no constraints in the activities of TNCs. They set up their base across many countries & gain from the rapid globalisation.
Anthony Giddens suggests globalisation has reduced time space distanciation. It's high modernity from which globalisation has spread its roots & currently affecting everybody's life.
- Modernisation, rapid communication, information technology are the gifts of globalisation which has reduced state's functional autonomy. National boundaries are blurred & national identities have mixed up.
- Poulantza advocates it's state's relative autonomy which still has some role to play. State's still formulate policies to give some concession to masses & perpetuate bourgeoisie dominance.
- Bob Jessop advocates it's operational autonomy of state in which Keynesian welfare state is converted to Schumpeterian workfare postnational regime. It's not mass production & consumption itself, rather it's knowledge economy that gives emphasis on innovation.
- Nordlinger advocates it's still state's autonomy that perpetuates. He categorises state's autonomy into 3 types in which state either reject, accept or modify the requests of the dominant class.
Hirst & Thompson are rather sceptical in their approach to Globalisation. Globalisation has spreaded its reach like nothing & it's giving maximum benefit to the rich at the cost of poor.
C. Wright Mills accuses USA to be a 'rogue state' of all & its presidents to be a biggest autocrat in the era of globalisation. USA due to its structural policy has taken fullest advantage of globalisation & controlled not only own economy rather that of all other nations worldwide. Media, military all have become slaves of nation's dictatorship. He accuses the 'Power elite' i.e. Corporate heads, military chiefs & politicians to be dictators who perpetuate their dominance on others.
Hence, while globalisation is taken as a welcome step to reduce state's dictatorship or autonomy, many Sociologists have argued against it. Nevertheless, globalisation have provided opportunities to the citizens to try their fortune in other parts of world breaking the shackles of traditionalism. Hence, it can be advocated as a 'necessary evil' which is a boon for many & bane for others.
Close
None written.