Chapter 70 and the concept of "counterhegemonic globalization" shows how the concept of globalization in general can be utilized not just by corporations, but by movements seeking to expand their efforts of social progress. This sort of reminded me of one of our previous chapter about Greenpeace, and their global network of organization branches that span multiple countries. This comes to mind because building an international social movement is rather complex, and as mentioned in the Greenpeace chapter, the organization has to concentrate their efforts on environmental issues specific to different regions of the globe. This is something that I imagine a lot of social movements looking to globalize must take into consideration. Feminist movements, for example, have "wrestled with the contradictions of building politics around the universal language of rights," (552). Due to differing culture norms and practices, feminist issues vary from country to country and from circumstance to circumstance.
Chapter 76 provided an interesting prospective on the clash between globalism and nationalism. Prior to reading this chapter, I never interpreted authoritarianism in any sort of sympathetic light. When I think of authoritarianism, I think of overarching governments imposing extreme ideologies and mass control over a population. The author does acknowledge how there are these extreme subsets of nationalists that exist, whom are openly racist and refuse to accept those different from themselves. However, the author emphasizes that the ultimate goal of the generic nationalist is to protect their "group" or their "culture" in society. This of course does not justify any hate or discrimination that stems from the same parties of conservatism and authoritarianism, but it does show in a clearer way to me how a lot of people who consider themselves to be nationalists of their country can end up turning to far-right political parties and to people like Trump.
No comments:
Post a Comment