CC BY
13Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences 3 (2009 2) 379-383
УДК 130.1
Globalization and Regionalization as Two Forms of World Order: Social-Philosophical Analysis
Aleksandr M. Tajmulin*
Siberian Federal University, 79 Svobodny, Krasnoyarsk, 660041 Russia 1
Received 14.08.2009, received in revised form 21.08.2009, accepted 28.08.2009
There are two opposite tendencies in political researches: on one hand, there is striving for preservation of political order integrity, on the other hand, one common political order represents a variety of local discursive practices, as far as any attempt of political world's integral presentation starts to be considered as a comeback to the totalitarian ideology, where scientific discussions perform a function of legitimating narratives. We proceed from the fact, that globalization is a process, which we can actually witness ourselves, and that is why the form of its apprehension must be the most adequate and effective. To our mind, globalization and regionalization are the leading tendencies of the modern world order, which reveal themselves in corresponding forms. Modern researchers' works, being different by the character of investigation and the style of rendering, are very often united by the common idea: globalization is considered as complexly evolving open system, raising before the world a lot of problems, which solution, and consequently, the prospective of modern civilization development depend upon revealing and deep analysis of these problems.
Keywords: globalization; regionalization; world order; local; westernization; internationalization.
Point
In spite of there is a variety of approaches to the globalization essence research, it appears as a process of becoming of the human world's real value in its spiritual and all its material meanings. Thus, the perceived globalization is not limited by the planetary, physical, social and cognitive spaces, but it captures the inner world of society and man, and that is why it inevitably includes psychological, ideological and cultural components. History is considered to be just a drawing up of material being and means available to the man in order to come nearer to this idea, i.e. up to necessity and possibility to build one's
activity, proceeding from admitting of the world's integrity in all its aspects, starting from spiritual up to ecological. It appears to be quite a strictly determined process, upon such an understanding of globalization; though, it develops in a complicated way through the interchange of breakthroughs and backrushes, ups and downs [1, p. 139]. What we call globalization today is an episode of historical process, though qualitatively peculiar, as everything in history is [2, p. 56-57].
Example
I.I.Lukashuk: suggests more generalized definition of globalization, noting: «Globalization
* Corresponding author E-mail address: [email protected]
1 © Siberian Federal University. All rights reserved
presents by itself a worldwide process, which interconnects national social-economical institutions into one common economical and social system» [3, p. 1]. In this respect, globalization process essence reflexion by mean of finding of interrelation peculiarities between two categories of «civilization» and «globalization» is an important branch of the modern globalization research as one more attempt to universalize the world community. L.Karapetjan thinks the attempts to draw parallels between civilization and globalization to be unpersuasive in the aspect of admitted civilization criteria and their variations. M.Jepshtejn is sure, that we should introduce and use a new notion of «globosophy». Thereat, its most important components will be geosophy, biosophy and sociosophy. But, we hardly should rely upon the answer of A.Chumakov [4] that this is not the task of philosophers to study the problems of globalization, as far as the answer to the question «to be or not to be» is already given by the fact of writing of the books about globalization.
While analyzing globalization, many authors proceed from differentiation of two types of modernization - westernization and catching-up modernization. For example, V.M. Mezhuev considers that, «today, on the West, modernization is admitted to be an old-fashioned and useless model of development», «the project of modernization ... has given its place to a new global project, wherein the life of people within the economical system is perceived not on a national, but on a world-wide scale» [5, p. 17].
Most often there are singled out several such borders and, correspondingly, several understandings of globalization as a phenomenon in the western and the Russian literature. According to one of them, globalization is an exceptionally modern phenomenon, dating back approximately to the middle of 1980-s, and it is also «international», taking place and
developing exceptionally in the international life - communications, economics, and politics. In this respect, globalization is interpreted as especially large-scaled internationalization, having broken forth through all the known frames and being supplemented by informational technologies of the period. Being understood this way, globalization is rather often directly or implicitly connected to the crisis and dissolution of the USSR, which has given the way to USA-centric world determination, and by extreme estimations - to transference of the whole world into American super-colony (with only exception of China).
According to A.S.Panarin's mind, the main meanings of globalization ideology are the following: the position of gradual going away from all the local interests, norms and traditions, the trampling upon the state as a carrier of regionalism; the refusal from most of achievements in economics, politics and other spheres; the singling out of one side of the process - the resources planning availability to the benefit of mighty states and to the prejudice of peripheral ones and so on. Globalism appears to be as an opposition of the minority, having acquired the highest mobility, to the inert majority of people [6, p. 5-26].
And only some of the researchers define globalization, denoting «economical internationalization», «social internationalization», «cultural internationalization» and so on. Thus, according to Ju.Shishkov, globalization is a spatial characteristic of mankind's economical life internationalization at the present stage, while today's integration is the highest degree of just the same internationalization [7]. G.H.Shahnazarov considers globalization and internationalization to be equal notions [8, p. 185]. To the mind of A.P.Butenko, though, there are a lot of definitions of the considered phenomena, all the authors, who write about globalization, explain it as «today's
form of economical life internationalization, and it was spoken about in the course of all the XX century» [9, p. 3]. We think that the main direction and a certain implication of the definition of globalization through internationalization are hidden in the propaganda of inevitable exit of sovereign states from the historical arena and the loss of the main democratic requirement -powerful sovereignty of the nation.
The attempt to systemize different conceptions and quite different definitions of the notion of «globalization» are given in the monograph of V.P.Vawekin, I.A.Muntjan, A.P.Ursul «Globalization: What is it?», where the proper world vision is given through the notion of «globalization»: «... globalization - is... a camouflage form of globalism ideology, which uses world development objective tendencies for substantiation of egoistic national interests priorities of the modern international relation «grands», for justification of hegemonies politics in international affairs» [10, p. 76-77].
The given approach resonates with the fundamental research work of M. Deljagin, who has commented the current situation the following way: «The bitter truth for every analytics lies in the fact, that modern global contest is led by heterogeneous and partially unobservable subjects, existing on different surfaces, striving to irreconcilable targets and acting by heterogeneous methods. They are not able to understand (and sometimes even to notice) each other, because of fundamental distinctions within the system of values and the line of action, and that deprives them very often of the very opportunity to come to not a tactical, concluded for the sake of some local target, but to a long-lasting agreement» [11, p. 330]. That is why globalization research demands special efforts and is hardly possible without a systematic analysis.
In the article «Globalization in a New Civilization Strategy» A.D.Ursul and T.A.Ursul
pay special attention to a socio-natural vision of globalization, which, according to their point of view, «allows to understand more deeply the essential features of this civilizational and, at the same time, planetary evolutional process» [12, p. 26]. Considering globalization as an objective law, being expressed in a global integrity appropriation by the system of «man-society-nature», the authors disclose the socio-natural contradiction of the process and prove it to be caused by the market-economy centric model of unsustainable development, which lies in the basis of the modern stage of globalization.
L.N.Moskvichev singles out two points of view of the modern globalization process vision: 1) globalization as an assemblage of political, economical, organizational, and cultural-ideological measures, taken by the Largest Western Economies (first of all USA) for the purpose of semination of western values, institutions, way of life and way of thinking all over the world; 2) globalization as an assemblage of objective-subjective fundamental processes, significantly changing the basis and the image of civilization and adumbrating a new stage of the mankind development. Comparing the first analysis level with the visible part of the iceberg, the author rightfully thinks globalization in its essential, civilizational key to be the main object of philosophical reflection and dedicates the major part of the work to the second analysis level. Generally, we share the given approach and consider it inevitable to single out the main qualitative distinction of globalization from the former forms of international connections. It consists in the following: being basically a complex of informational, technological and economical processes, it causes qualitative changes in other social spheres, and what is the main thing - in the way of life and thinking of huge masses of people [13].
The complex essence of globalization is revealed in the articles of K.H.Dalokarov and F.D.Demidov « Globalization and the Problems of Nonlinear Civilizational Development» and VV.Krylov «Global Transformations in the Context of Synergetic Paradigm». The authors of the first article proceed from globalization interpretation as of a becoming reality, being in the process of development and having many forms and ways of manifestation. To understand the modern stage of globalization means, to their mind, to understand the essence of civilizational transformations, taking place in the world under the influence of various factors, especially geopolitical, economical, and scientific-technological. And substantiating the thesis, that multidimensionality, complexity and difficult predictability of globalization process are the result of its openness and nonlinearity, the authors think one of the main reasons of today's civilizational crisis to be the attempts of industrially developed countries, especially USA, to apply the linear scheme of world development in a variety of ways and to manage this complex, unstable reality from one single centre. The authors affirm inappropriateness of the linear-forceful solution to local and regional conflicts, which has become the leading practice of the last decades, and they also pay attention to the fact that, on one hand, the world is really in need of common targets elaboration for solving global problems and overcoming the crisis of basic civilizational values, but, on the other hand, its growing complexity makes it difficult to manage so complex, open and unstable systems [14, p. 56]. A.G.Volodin and G.K.Shirokov fairly underline that globalization as a many-sided phenomenon is not the result of transient or sudden changes, but a gradual, nonlinear process, with some periods of acceleration and moderation. In the course of their research work, the authors rightfully strive to «correlate economical and political aspects of globalization» [15, p. 14]. Though, other researchers, for example E.Bragina, do not quite agree with
such an approach: «shall we nevertheless pay attention to the instability of most organizations and associations of this group of the countries, which have partially ceased their existence or lost their influence, when the opposition between USA and USSR has become impossible» [16, p. 201].
Resume
That is why the scientific task within the considered problem is the following: to reveal the main parameters of globalism influence over the main tendencies of social progress on the basis of objective analysis of globalism phenomenon and to work out scientifically substantiated recommendations on the optimal organization of international interrelations in all the spheres of their life activity. The role of science is also to anticipate the subjectivism of the leading countries' politicians in their ambition to speed up the evolutionary objective laws of globalism and to perform globalization at their sole discretion, and, at the same time, to anticipate the attempts of developing and hindward countries to counteract this objective process [17, p. 47]. It is also important to take into consideration that studies of globalization, as contrasted with philosophy, investigate the most general objective laws of the mankind development in its quantitative form and, what is not at all the sphere of philosophical interests, they construct quantitative models of a viable controlled world order in conditions of the anthropogenously overloaded Earth. Studies of globalization harmoniously combine fundamental and applicative investigations and research works [18, p. 57].
We can come to a conclusion, that the models of globalization, created by western sociologists and philosophers, actually suggest the transition to a structurally homogeneous society by means of structures unification and with minimal external social multiformity. Regionalization can become a real alternative to such a world order.
References
N.A. Kosolapov. The Role of Geopolitics in the Epoch of Globalization/ N.A. Kosolapov // Vostok (ORIENS). - 2003. - №4.
E.N.Ustjugova. Globalization and Culture: the Historical Context / E.N.Ustjugova // Filosofskie nauki. - 2005. - №12.
I.I.Lukashuk. Globalization, State, and Law. XXI century / I.I.Lukashuk. - Moscow, 2000. p. 1.
A.N.Chumakov. Globalization. Contours of the Integral World / A.N.Chumakov. - Moscow: TK Velbi, Prospekt Publishing House, 2005.
V.M.Mezhuev. Modernization and Globalization: Two Projects of «the Modern Epoch» / V.M.Mezhuev // Globalization and Perspectives of the Modern Civilization / Executive Editor K.H.Delokarov. Moscow: KMK, 2005.
A.S.Panarin. the Temptation by Globalism / A.S.Panarin. - Moscow, 2000.
Ju.Shishkov Heterogeneity and Development Stages of Globalization Studies / Ju.Shishkov // MEiMO. - 2001. - №2.
G.Shahnazarov. Globalization and Globalization Studies - the Phenomenon and the Theory. Pro et Contra / G.Shahnazarov. - Osen' 2000. Vol. 5. - №4.
A.P.Butenko. Globalization: its Essence and Today's Problems / A.P.Butenko // Social-Humanitarian Knowledge. - 2001. - №3.
N.I.Vawekin, M.A.Mutjan, A.D.Ursul. Globalization and Steady Development / N.I.Vawekin, M.A.Mutjan. - Moscow, 2002.
M.G.Deljagin. the World Crisis: the General Theory of Globalization / M.G.Deljagin. - 3-d revised and enlarged edition. - Moscow: INFRA-M, 2003.
A.D.Ursul, T.A.Ursul. Globalization in a New Civilizational Strategy / A.D.Ursul, T.A.Ursul // Globalization and Perspectives of the Modern Civilization / Executive Editor K.H.Delokarov. -Moscow: KMK, 2005.
L.N.Moskvichev. Globalization - Two Analysis Levels / L.N.Moskvichev // Globalization and Perspectives of the Modern Civilization / Executive Editor K.H.Delokarov. - Moscow: KMK, 2005.
K.H.Delokarov, F.D.Demidov. Globalization and the Problems of Nonlinear Civilizational Development / K.H.Delokarov, F.D.Demidov // Globalization and Perspectives of the Modern Civilization / Executive Editor K.H.Delokarov. - Moscow: KMK, 2005.
A.G.Volodin, G.K.Shirokov. Globalization: its Beginning, Tendencies, and Perspectives / A.G.Volodin, G.K.Shirokov. - Moscow: IV RAN, 2002.
E.A.Bragina. Is Globalization Global? / E.A.Bragina // Vostok (ORIENS). - 2003. - №5.
L.M.Karapetjan. About the Notions of «Globalism» and «Globalization» / L.M.Karapetjan // Filosofskie nauki. - 2003 - №3.
V.V.Olen'ev, A.P.Fedotov. Globalization Studies on the Verge of XXI Century / V.V.Olen'ev, A.P.Fedotov // Voprosy filosofii. - 2003. - №4.
