The ending of the Nation-State and the growth of the Civil Society (Sumblog 7)

As seen during the last week, we looked at the decline of the current nation-state, and the growth of an overarching civil society. I both like and dislike the idea of a civil society. Specifically for me there are two pros and two cons that are equally strong for why a civil society is good, and why it is bad. Below, I will go over each of my pros and cons for a civil society.

My top two pros for why the decline of a nation-state and the growth of a civil society is good are; when a civil society is fully installed, being able to know what a global good and bad will be easier. At least in theory, because of the homogenization of the world-culturally speaking- we would see a whole lot less diversity. With less diversity, it would mean that people would, in general, believe in the same things and knowing the difference between "right and wrong" would be more simplistic in our global civil society. Then the second pro is if we homogenize the globe we would see that there is really only one way of going about doing things. This, at least in theory, would make there be more equality for the countries that are currently stuck in poverty. If we have global policies that help them, then other countries would be required to help those countries that need it.

http://developmentdiaries.com/the-role-of-the-civil-society/

Now, I also have two cons for why the decline of the current nation-state and the rise of a civil society are bad. They basically are looking at the above pros, and seeing some major flaws in them. The first is having a homogenous globe cute out all the differences that some cultures hold so dear. I think it would be hard for all other countries to conform to the "western way" (and let us be honest, that is exactly what a civil society would emphasize.) I also think that the view is very ethnocentric, and unfair to those not in our region or that doesn’t have the same views as the "global north." The second con is, while in theory having a civil society should help other countries become richer. I think that in actual practice, it will only help richer countries become richer, and poorer countries become poorer. Because if we go off the current view that western societies believe in, all countries would conform to capitalism. As seen over the last couple weeks in class, there is a clear decline of economic equality going on because of capitalism. That is why I think that it would only really get worse if there were to be a civil society.

I chose the above picture, beacuse I think it illustrates what we currently believe a civil society will be. I also think it might be a very Utopian way of looking at a civil society, but still. One can always dream right?

Let's Celebrate Columbus Day? (SumBlog 5)

Modernization versus dependency, those are just two of the terms that we discussed in class last week. Now, I don’t know about you, but I had heard of modernization before. Maybe not the exact definition we went over in class, but overall, you hear about it in the news all the time. “This country does this, one step closer to becoming modern.” Or “This nation is becoming more democratic, it’s finally breaking free, and becoming more ‘American’.” Now, I had always had a little problem with how the news worded this, but I just let it go because, well it’s part of our world. After discussion in class however, and learning that there IS another view, I now understand that looking at the world from one perspective can be very ethnocentric.

                This second term, Dependency, now it was very interesting to learn about, and to commemorate today- it being Columbus Day and all- let’s look at how different our world would be if Columbus hadn’t only viewed the world through the Modernization framework. What if Columbus viewed America though the scope of the Dependency theory? How different would our world be right now? Well, let’s be honest, it would be completely different. In fact, some of us might not even be here. He probably would have respected the Native American’s land, and realized he hadn’t discovered America, well, because other people lived here. He also wouldn’t think that any country not European was backwards. But as we know, he changed many things, and most of those changes are why America is the way it is now, and also probably the reason that some of us are even here now. So, while he didn’t do the most amazing stuff, and in fact, now we would consider what he did genocide, racist, and just plain horrific. So, I’m going to pose the question to you, seeing as I honestly don’t know what I would want. If you could, would you want Columbus to have a different view when “discovering” America? Or, maybe the ends justify the means? Now I will end with this picture I’ve been seeing on Facebook all day. Enjoy, and thanks for reading.

Global Economy (SumBlog 4)

What on earth is a global economy? It’s a question that we are asked to answer, but if we have no idea of what our own individual global identity is, how are we supposed to say that we have an exact definition of a global economy? Well, one could look at it and say that it is the idea and action of all the countries in the world participating in the economy to share and receive goods and services to benefit their country’s well being. However, let’s really take a look at how this global economy turns out.

                What type of economy do we consider a world economy? Well, it shouldn’t be too big of a shock, it’s a capitalistic society. Now, is that really what’s best for the entire world? Honestly, I don’t think so . I think that each country should have the right to choose their own economic system, and then try and work it into a global economy where every country participates if it so desires in a way it so desires. I mean, would that really be so bad? I don’t think so. However it would be VERY hard, and very complicated… but even now, as we look at a global economic crisis, and the US governmental shutdown over a budget, are we really in the best place possible right now? I don’t think so, and I think it’s time that we stopped looking at what has worked, and start looking at would, and could make things better. If we always stayed the same, and never really created new and advanced ways to do things, would we really be better off? I mean think about it, if we never advanced past the 1950’s, there would be many things that would be completely horrible, in terms of workforce, and in terms of equality. Attached to this blog I have put a picture of the world on the different types of money currently used. Now, when I see this, I just have to think, would a world that only values the money shared between it, be able to still value it’s people the same way? With that thought, I leave you to make your own decisions on whether or not a global economy is really the best.