|
Volume XIV (2003)
Book Review:
Globalization
and the Nation-State
Ali Kamali,
Department of
Government, Social Work and Sociology, Missouri Western State College, St. Joseph, MO 64507
Holton, Robert. Globalization
and the Nation-State. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998. 232 pp.
$25.00 (paper).
Most
social science scholars agree that globalization has become one of the
leading socio-political and economic theories after the fall of the
Soviet Union. The worldwide capitalist economy has been a major force of
convergence since the late 1980s, to the extent that it has compelled
many leaders to propose local economic strategies for restructuring
their economies and integrating them into the world economic system.
Though the academic circle has been preoccupied with explaining
globalization and how every one in the world is adapting to it, the
preponderance of the analysis missed a focus on the effects that
globalization may have on the well-being of the citizens in any given
nation; especially, when the focus is on globalization and its relevance
to nation-state, the growing ethnic upheaval, and the ways in which
these three items tie together.
Because of its unique approach to globalization, Robert Holton’s
Globalization and the Nation-State is a pioneering work that can be
characterized as focusing on the interplay among the
three—globalization, the nation-state, and the growing ethnic upheaval.
The study, in this regard, is interdisciplinary in nature; and, its
intended design covers a broad range of cross-disciplinary audience. The
book draws upon a wealth of information that characterizes the massive
transformation in contemporary societies in terms of the increasing
transnational development and the growing multicultural and multiethnic
tendencies that transcend transnational political and economic policies.
Holton’s underlying premise in this book is that globalization can not
be summarized to economic globalization; it is as a force that dictates
changes in the fabric of societies which, in addition to economic
globalization, includes a change in affective judgment, moral
righteousness, values, and a host of other socially and politically
relevant variables. Despite such a strong approach, Holton is neutral
while defining globalization as a manifestation of a common ground,
similarity of insight, and “one single world of human society in which
all elements are tied together in one interdependent whole” (2). In
addressing these points, he attempts to define globalization by raising
a series of provocative questions that evaluate the positive and
negative opinions regarding globalization. The book, therefore, covers
globalization in terms of its meaning; its history and dynamics; and,
its economic, political and cultural aspects in each of its main six
chapters, respectively.
In
Chapters Two and Three, Holton discusses the current images of world
order under globalization, and focuses on the range of evaluative
standpoints—from a commitment to cosmopolitan ideas of social harmony
and communities free from conflict, to valuing national autonomy and
localism—from which globalization, and specifically economic
globalization, is discussed. Here, the author presents a series of
criticisms against theories of globalization and their incapability to
deliver a viable explanation that accounts for diversity in the rise of
counter-movements that emphasize national differences and the continuing
cultural appeal of particular countries or localities. In this regard,
Holton emphatically rules out the notion of globalization as a unitary
process with a single logic (i.e., capitalism), but quickly suggests a
more complex multinational descriptive of globalization that becomes the
building block of his approach to globalization. Holton’s multinational
description of globalization, as he claims, aims to sensitize us to
similar complexities in normative debates—e.g., attempts to secure
global human rights, democratic governments and the exercise of
self-determination, or environmental protection movements—that revolve
around globalization. Because the social multi-dimensionality of
globalization is mirrored by a normative multi-dimensionality, Holton
prefers to think of the phenomenon in plural rather than singular
terms—globalizations, not globalization.
Whether democratic challenges and national sovereignty lose themselves
in economic globalization is the question that Holton addresses in
Chapter Four. His general sentiment regarding the rise of nation-states
alongside the globalization process is optimistic. Therefore, Holton
believes that it is unhealthy to assume that the global challenges to
democracy at the national level are tainted with the loss of some
absolute sense of national sovereignty. He further argues that the
“challenges globalization poses to democracy are more to do with
increased global interconnectedness and with inequality of access to
power both between nations and between different interests within them”
(200). Therefore, he is aware of the difficulties that democratic ideals
at national levels can create, and the complexities that global
governance can produce by relying on experts and the powerful position
of scientists and professionals from the First World. Nonetheless, he
agrees that the globalization process permeates those political
boundaries within which democratic self-determination is seemingly
practiced.
Although the discussion in the first four chapters, for the most part,
rested on economic globalization, Holton shifts his attention in Chapter
Five toward political globalization in terms of a global polity. To him,
a sense of global order is similar to a complex cobweb that links
governmental and non-governmental bodies. With this notion, Holton sees
emerging new players on the political scenes which may be either
multiple or overlapping powers and may constitute several layers of
interconnectedness among peoples and nations. The interesting point
regarding this issue is how Holton advocates the notion that a more
“complex globally organized polity” is needed for a “territorially
bounded world” to operate effectively. This way, it would appear that
Holton is suggesting to bridge the gap between the global, national, and
local level polities or political organizations through the recognition
that can be given to their diverse communities so that global harmony
can be maintained.
The
underpinning notion in Chapters Four and Five is that there are other
developing forces in the making. While Holton is constantly challenging
the power of globalization vis-à-vis the growing continuity in the
development of nation-state and ethnicity, he maintains that these
developmental forces are complementary rather than conflicting. In the
meantime, he sees the fusion of ethnicity and nation-state as a reaction
against the hegemonizing tendencies of [capitalistic] globalization.
Hence Holton rejects the idea of globalization as an evolutionary
process. Instead, he argues that globalization is developing alongside
of ethnicity and nation-state: a culmination of many mini-globalization.
Such thinking has given two distinct characteristics to Holton’s thesis,
which separates his approach to globalization from those of others in
this area: (1) he looks at the scopes and limits of globalization
(global development) not as a uniform or unifying force, while treating
globalization as a phenomenon that transcends a simple idea of economic
growth driven by the logic of capital accumulation. And, (2) he looks at
globalization as an historical, rather than a contemporary, phenomenon
that is intensifying the economic, political, social and cultural
relations that transcend national boundaries. Thus, Holton contends the
world may be seen as politically centered pockets when the relationship
between interest groups, such as national governments, and a range of
international bodies, such as NGOs, are concerned.
In
support of this thesis—i.e., the multifaceted globalization due to the
rise of ethnicity and nation-states—Holton pays much attention in
Chapter Six to the recent explosion of ethno-nationalism and the revival
of ethnicity in settings of migrant settlements. The preponderance of
the discussion in Chapter Six revolves around the development of such
anti-global trends. In verifying the mechanisms of nation-state building
and the rise of ethnicity, Holton carefully argues that the trends—in
cultural identity—all suggest in them “different ways that the project
of mutual accommodation between contrasting loyalties is an extremely
difficult one” (203). While cultural identity in terms of
cosmopolitanism is restrictive in the age of globalization, Holton
expects territoriality and national sovereignty to continually affect
cultural identity. But, the issue remains whether cultural identity
reinforces territoriality; or territoriality and cultural identities
lend themselves to mutual accommodation instead of a unidirectional
effect or conflict. These are among the questions that Holton addresses
in Chapter Seven.
From
the overall discussions presented in Globalization And the
Nation-State, it can be concluded that Holton is alerting us of the
links between cultural diversity (i.e., the rise of ethnicity) and
national sovereignty (i.e., the rise of nation-state) that are included
in recent globalization processes, which raise great challenges to the
uniformity or the homogenizing effects of globalization that other works
on this subject have envisioned: that globalization is predominantly
based on the Western principle of capitalism. The justification for
Holton’s diversion from this general universal theory of globalization,
as we have implicitly seen so far, is that globalization is not an all
encompassing social trend, but one that is mediated by local
developments that affect nation building. Hence Holton argues that
globalization does not overwhelm nation-state or destroy cultural
differences at the local level. For example, a small indication in
support of this assertion is Holton’s focus on the unevenness that can
be observed in the process of globalization of loyalty; an oddity that
makes the debates resting on globalization of culture far from any
viable resolution. Thus, Holton’s emphasis on the roles of international
bodies—e.g., NGOs—in reviving political and cultural activism within a
nation-state is to reinforce this idea.
In
addition, Holton does not deny the profound influence that globalization
has on patterns of local social change, given that each nation has a
varied share of power distribution in global scene. Whether
globalization has a polarizing, homogenizing, or hybridizing effects
(terms that Holton uses extensively and excessively in the latter part
of the book), the underlying analytical challenge in his analysis of
globalization is the equity he would need to maintain between
local-historical specificity and the significant dynamics of
globalization at the macro-level operation. In this course, Holton
deliberately spends quite a bit of time critiquing facets of
globalization theory and tries to expose them, while treating
globalization as a challenge to human society—particularly, in the areas
where globalization, buy its nature, can permeate “autonomous” and
“self-constituting” societies. Unfortunately, Holton is entrapped in a
similar cyclical approach that criticizes other theories of
globalization—specifically, when he maintains that globalization
represents a powerful force for social change in autonomous regions
toward convergence, yet autonomous and self-governing sovereign nations
are on the rise. Whatever this dynamic, Holton tries to rescue himself
by asserting that the nature of globalization is vague. This may seem
true, but isn’t a book on globalization supposed to unveil its
vagueness? Nevertheless, Holton agrees with those whom he has criticized
that globalization is an unstoppable force; and, it is creating a new
form of discourse that permeates the relationship between the
nation-states and localities. But he diverts from others by indicating
that globalization has not been able to overrun nation-states nor
localities. Whether globalization is good, bad or a mixed reception, the
bottom line for Holton is that the judgment depends on what we believe
globalization to be, or which voices or interests are doing the judging.
This seems to qualify Holton’s theory of globalization as middle range.
Volume XIV |
