Re: altermondialistes, altermondialisation, altermondialisme (Le Monde)

For one thing, now I am writing an article (in Ukrainian) in which I show that in reality ALL forms of globalisation come from the will of powerful countries to obtain political influence all over the world. Globalisation is actually politics, and little more.

 

Warren wrote: "For example, even in 2003 I doubt that humankind is much
more "globalized" than it was already in 1903". I agree. This is shown in an excellent book:

 

Paul Hirst and Grahame Thompson. Globalization in Question - Second edition. - 1999.

 

Secondly, I would not speak about globalisation of the few and globalisation of all. Globalisation is "of all", since the word global means something that coucerns the entire world, i.e. "all". I'd rather speak about benefits of globalisation for the few and sufferings from the globalisation for the rest.

 

Globalism is a stage of capitalistic imperialism, according to the works of Oleg Bilorus, a ukrainian scientist and politician. In other words, it is the new world system within capitalistic system. It has already formed(!) and it is understood as a system of total economic and political rule of the new global monopolistic corporations (TNCs) in the world. The TNCs intensify the exploitation of many countries and regions, including their own.

 

I believe the definition itself reminds of marxism and also of world-systems theory. The essence of it is the eternal theme that the strong exploit the weak. I don't think this is too dangerous and might lead to a new world war. Now world wars are too dangerous even for the leading states.

 

World polity? In some spheres - yes, in some others - no.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Luke Rondinaro [mailto:larondin@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 5:34 AM
To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu; Evgeni Nikolaev
Subject: Re: altermondialistes, altermondialisation, altermondialisme (Le Monde)

This makes great sense, and it definitely squares with my own understanding of the globalization issue.  It's a matter of the globalization of ALL versus the globalization ("mondialisation") of the few.

 

One other idea, might it also be correct to make this distinction and classification? --->

 

Globalization of the Few = Political Globalism

Globalization of All = [True] "Globalization"

 

It may not even be a good idea at all.  Still I welcome your thoughts on the notion.  Best!  (Luke R.)

 

Luke Rondinaro, The Consilience Projects

www.topica.com/lists/consiliencep