Globalization evaluates world’s egalitarianism

Globalization have changed the world. We can exchange the stories with the people from the opposite side of the world. Globalization also changed the way people think about International Institutions as context and norms of the global community have changed. Spread of egalitarianism with the system of democracy allowed countries to participate in the global politics. However countries became more of a ‘polity’ and it have put cooperation in risk as formation of polity enhanced contested globalization. The true system of democracy in international institutions have not been applied because some powerful countries has more power in the process of making agreements and less powerful countries’ interests have been undervalued or underrepresented.

In the past, major powers have dominated the process of building international institutions. Bretton Woods and Washington Consensus are the two major examples. The contestation of those major powers served as an incident of decline for global governance. Therefore, post Washington Consensus moved away from realism by bringing in elements like civil society, transparency, new international economic architecture and safe nets. In fact, in more recent years, civil societies, activists,and  NGOs took a major role in the international community, especially by raising awareness of global issues and by providing aids. Even though big role of major powers can be helpful for keeping an order in global governance and international institution, it is also dangerous because they can use their power to legitimize their power. So more representation of developing countries in post Washington Consensus is a plausible change. More developing countries should be able to participate in global governance and voice their opinion rather than being the bystander. For this to happen, it is important for major powers to change institutional pattern that deals with international economy and culture, so that not only developing countries but civil societies can contribute more to global decision making process. Higgot argues that globalization have generated technological and economic connection but not cultural, societal connections. In global governance, understanding different cultural, societal norms of different parts of the world in so important. The term ‘global governance’ itself carries the underlying assumption that there is a set of rule to govern the world. However, not every country can be governed under one definite set of universal international institution. Therefore ‘global public policy’ has been used as a more acceptable term for ‘global governance’. In global public policy, one of the most important limitations of post Washington Consensus that we must overcome is the relationship between capitalism and institutional pattern. Current system of global policy empower capitalism by giving more power to those countries with more money. This is not to undo capitalism. Capitalism do have its merits but it also creates big gap between the poor and the rich. As the international community is trying to reach equality, capitalism have played a role as an obstacle. To bring equality to the global public policy, alternative form of system is needed to strengthen the relationship between developed and developing countries, and to connect civil societies to the international roam.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s