Topic: Critically evaluate the claim that the processes of globalization are undermining the democratic state.

Introduction

Although the term is today is being used in a very simplistic manner, Globalization is actually quite a controversial and complex process. The world has been changed in many ways due to it and several countries have come closer due to this. However, although globalization has played a part in bringing countries together, in some ways it has even drifted them apart. Amongst the many changes that have happened due to Globalization, one of the most controversial is the change in the political culture in different countries of the world. It is agreed by many scholars that the status of the best form of government is being given to democracy commonly around the world (Held 2004; Dryzek and Patrick 2009; Thompson 1999). However, this essay critically evaluates the claim that the processes of

globalization are undermining the democratic state.

Democracy and Globalization

Democracy as a concept dates back to the Ancient Greek civilization. The ancient Greek term from which this word is derived is dmokrata meaning rule of the people. According to the Dictionary.com Unabridged Random House n.d it is defined as follows: a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. Since the downfall of communism In the late 1980s, democracy has increased in popularity as a form of government.

On a parallel basis, globalization has also received increasing popularity in the last decades with countries opening themselves to it. American entrepreneur Charles Russell created this concept in the late 1800s, but it got popular by the social scientists and economists in the. Those in favour of this phenomenon, the Pro-Globalists, have an argument that countries inevitably have to open them to it, they can not put up a barrier against globalization. If they do so it would mean

isolation from the rest of the world and a loss of many benefits that they could have achieved. Hence, through this essay it will be examined if globalization has been the reason these countries haves opted for a democratic government set up and if it is, the reasons behind this will be identified.

Is Globalization a Threat to Democratic State

Many scholars agree with the idea, amongst them Jens Bartelson, that instead of helping the growth of a democratic state, globalization actually poses a threat to them. According to Bartelson (2004), globalization weakens the vital requirements of national identity, patriotism and state autonomy Due to this reason, one can say that in terms, political globalization is contradictory. According to one of the anti-Globalist theories, the decline of the nation state is being caused due to globalization as governments now have lesser controls over their trade, economy and borders.

In another past, complete control over markets, capitals and exchange rates had belonged to the nation state. Today, the state is becoming outdated while trans-national companies have become greatly vital to the economy. Such situations are supportive to the argument that the power of the state and democracy is being reduced due to globalization, which is resulting in a void democracy. According to Skeptics, while globalization leads to promotions of opportunities for increase in wealth and greater growth, it has also resulted in greater socio-economic disparity amongst people, resulting in nations which are less democratic and instead being ruled by rich multi nationals. According to Quan and Reuvnay (2003), the main competition among

governments is on access to foreign capital and Governments now compete amongst each other for foreign capital and design their policies for appeasement of global firms and investors, who

might not be accountable to, and nor work for the best interests of the public, the voters. Quan and Reuveney (2003) say that when such a situation prevails, the decline of democracy follows. As previously stated, scholars such as Peter Drucker are of the point of view that those who are less fortunate do not receive benefits of globalization and are instead crippled due to it. Drucker (1994) argues that local companies which are unable to compete with multi nationals due to the competition getting an international scale inevitably loose from greater economic openness.

Hence in this globalization battles, the unfortunate losers tend to gather untiy and support through their religious or ethnic identities. With this, the wealthy economic winners are encouraged to maintain their dominance over the poor ones and subside their competition. Robertson (1992) is of the belief that such actions make the social inequality worse and lower the progress made by democracy. However, this inequality is not limited to just a national scale. Speaking in terms of the international community, the drift between the developing countries from the south and the developed countries from the west has also intensified due to globalization. Samir (1996) points out further that on International forums and organizations an example of which is the United Nations it can be seen commonly that countries of the elite wealthy class get to have the final say in important issues and conflicts which are discussed; even the politics of the less developed countries are then swayed to their own favor. An argument presented by ODonnell (1993), the concept of participation and citizenship should be rooted and active in the population for a democracy to work in a stable and functional manner. Due to Globalization an individual has been transformed in to a material man working more for their economic interest and less concerned with the public policy content.

Observed from the above arguments, there are various reasons for how globalization has lead to the weakening of democracy around the world. However, as considering any other controversial issue, both the sides of the argument need to be evaluated so that the implications of the statements could be fully comprehended. As for this reason, several notable scholars have made claims which defend the idea that the spread of democracy in the world has been facilitated by globalization.

According to the book Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy by Schumpeter economic development has been promoted by globalization and this has lead to an increase in the number of well trained and educated citizens. In turn this has lead to lower income inequality, quite contrastingly to the previous statements. This argument is an illustration of how globalistion benefits the freedom and development of people.

Due to globalization, multi nationals and their powers have increased immensely since past few years. Nevertheless, there are many people, according to whom, democracy is an important element in international business, not only that but the importance of stability and peace cannot be declined for the purpose on investing in international countries. In the current times, all the democratic countries are in continuous fight with each other and there has been a growing demand of democratic government to maintain the peace worldwide. Democratic governments are required because as the economic links get stronger, the authoritarian countries feel the pressure from other countries.

Authoritarian countries or states get minimum opportunities to strengthen their economic links and they do not get benefits of globalization because of their rigid policies, as, the focus of globalization for authoritarian countries to decentralize their power and handover the control to the democratic market. This fluctuating economy is called as laissez-faire, which is the expression in French language and which means let it be.

Globalization helps immensely in promoting democracy. Reducing various costs like information and travelling help people to gain knowledge from all over the world along with their own government, that is, the democratic states can promote their concepts and ideas to other autocratic countries freely because of the fact that autocratic countries have less control over worldwide information. (Hanen 1990) suggested other advantages of globalization like reducing the information gaps between various borders and exchanging values with other countries.

People are of the view that by trying to make the autocratic countries democrat, there would be intense globalization. Countries are transforming their activities from national level towards global level. Globalization is not at all about various states but it is being done at international level (Held et al., 1999; Short, 2001). According to Ulrich Beck (2002: 53), all the states are willing to deal internationally and there is no more a concept of dealing at the national level. The idea of dealing at the national level is an old concept nowadays. Globalization has many challenges to deal with, and there are various challenges in dealing globally. Globalization helps countries to become independent like NAFTA, EU, WTO and UN. These are the organizations who are working globally and likewise, other organizations are emerging on the bigger and global level.

Because of the fast paced era of globalization, states can no longer make independent economic or even social policies. Organizations like WTO and IMF are asked to make policies because of which market remain as free and liberal as possible by reducing the tax rates, deregulating, make it privatize and considering social activities. Castells (2010: 254) is of the view that because of the various factors like budgetary and monetary policies, government dependence and exchange rates, government and state level does not have the proper control which they used to have before the era of globalization. At the national level, it has become immensely difficult to control various policies like, monetary policies, not just that, but deciding about the budget, policies related to trade and production, corporate taxes and ability to fulfill the commitments related to social benefits. This means that in order to make a nation progressive, a country needs to adopt globalization. However, there are various point of views where people consider globalization as a serious threat for a welfare state and this is the reason that Scholte (2000) noticed that there is a reduction in provisions related to welfare in majority of the countries. And written in Page (2004: 31) about the current trends like a move away from universal forms of state protection towards means-testing, higher eligibility requirements, inward Private-sector involvement and greater decentralization. According to Castells (2000), the era of welfare states is declining with the passage of time as the globalization is increasing. There would be major constraints for the welfare state because of highly globalized pattern.
Though, it should be noted that it does not convey the idea that national level work is completely obsolete because of highly globalized environment. According to Ohmae (2000:208) it is a nostalgic fiction. Moreover, it does not also convey the idea that these rapid changes are due to the growth of power of MNCs or because of centralized and global financial markets.

With the passage of time, there is an increase in the requirement of human rights and the growth on the similar factors, and hence, democracy is the only alternative available for the countries that are following autocratic strategies. The democratic countries have this concept that whosoever is not meeting the demands of humanitarian is disobeying the laws of democracy and hence they are considered as autocratic nations which are considered as non progressive in their policies. Democratic nations feel that autocratic countries do not give this power to its people to raise their voice and government do not consider their opinions while making strategies for the country and this is the reason that many countries took this decision to become democratic. The countries include Iraq and other Sub Saharan Africa. Recently, the organizations like World Bank and IMF took major steps and decisions to reform authoritarian countries in order to make them investing countries and make them the potential favorites for international investment opportunities. In this way, these countries would also become a significant part of the globalization (Kura 2005).

Due to globalization, the conflicts between militaries are arising among international countries. Many countries are of the view that globalization gave immense pressure to them to become democratic nation and follow the values made by western culture. Since the period of globalization, there is a cold war among the western democratic countries and the rest of the world. There are countries that do not consider and follow the western pattern of doing economic transactions are pressured and threatened to follow the western practices and are pressured to open up their economic boundaries in order to deal internationally.

Democracy is encouraged by globalization and there are numerous benefits associated with globalization. Worldwide global markets rely on the values which are democratic and the

organizations which follow democratic practices can enjoy the benefits on globalization as they get this chance to open up their economic boundaries and allow other countries to do various economic activities and explore available opportunities. The involvement of INGOs and other organizations improve the transparency of dealings which reduces the involvement of states and these all things help in making a country democratic in its economic dealings Western policymakers and nongovernmental groups trying to promote greater political liberalization have placed their faith in the indirect effects of globalization. An authoritarian government agrees to a global regime to gain benefits of one sort but is forced to accept the political consequences that follow. (Dalpino 2001).

While concluding, it is difficult to make the countries democratic and make them practice the economic dealings globally. The overall issue is very complex, and difficult to understand. It can also be considered as a serious threat to democracy as it damages the national identity, individuality of a nation and the basic necessities of a state. Many people are of the view that because of globalization, various nations are declining and they lose their control over their countrys economy along with the control over trade and borders. In the recent times, the concept of state is being obsolete and transnational companies are at boom and became a necessity for the economy. Though, there are various advantages and opportunities in being global and dealing globally, the biggest advantage and the opportunity is to grow economically at national and international level simultaneously.

Governments nowadays are trying to make foreign policies in order to attract worldwide investors to explore the available opportunities and make the most out of it. The policies are solely made to attract the international investors and this may not work in the favor of the

citizens of the country which destroys its main purpose (Quan & Reuveny 2003). There are numerous people who do not get benefited with the advantages of globalization; likewise, there are many organizations that cannot compete with multinational internationally which results in the negative outcomes. These negative outcomes of various small countries lead to the failure of economy for that specific country and hence results in weakness of democracy in that country.

Therefore, globalization made all the individuals concerned about their investment and make them feel more interested in exploring the opportunities internationally by coming up with their own strategies and public policies. Globalization has indeed made positive efforts towards making a country democratic in its policies. Through globalization, the productivity has also increased immensely and it helped people to become more educated and independent, that actually leads to economic development for various countries and also it decreases the inequality of the country based on economic activities. If a country has to compete internationally, they have to make democratic policies in order to maintain peace and sustainability in their country and other investing countries internationally.

As soon as the economic activities become expanded, authoritarian countries feel the pressure in order to become politically liberal countries. Globalization help the authoritarian countries to make their activities decentralized and become part of the democratic activities, not only that, but globalization also help and encourage authoritarian countries to decentralize their power and control to step in the international markets, which are actually following the democratic policies made by various countries, because of globalization, there is a reduced costs in various activities, like travelling and information cost. People now can access the information without spending money. It has become easy to get the information from their own government and from the

overall world, which actually means that autocratic countries can take and follow the policies of democratic countries and become an integral part of globalization. Autocratic countries can minimize their spending on information while following the democratic policies (Hanen 1990). These are the various reasons because of which globalization is encouraged by various INGOs and because of them the democratic policies and activities are growing and expanding at a rapid pace since previous decades. Hence, it can be concluded that democracy has lead to various activities of globalization and irrespective of the fact that it has decreased the power of various nations but the democracy has been spread worldwide because of the growing pattern of globalization.

Marsh, D. et al (2006) Globalization and the State, in Hay, C. et al. (eds.) The State. See also Ch.10 Sorensen, The Transformation of the State

Dryzek, John and Patrick Dunleavy (2009) Theories of the Democratic State, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, Ch.14 Globalization. King, R. and Kendall, G. (2004) The State, Democracy and Globalization, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, Chapter 6 Globalisation and Chapter 7 Suprastate governance Gill, G. (2003) The Nature and Development of the Modern State, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, Chapter 7 State Capacity in a Globalised World Held, D. (2006) Models of Democracy (3rd edition), Cambridge, Polity, Chapter 11 Democracy, the Nation-State and the Global system. Held, D. (2006) From City States to a Cosmopolitan Order? in Goodin, R.E. and Pettit, P. (eds) Contemporary Political Philosophy, London: Blackwell, pp.107-125 Dahl, R. A. (1999) Can international organizations be democratic? in I. Shapiro and C. Hacker-Cordon (eds) Democracy's Edges, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp19-36. David Held (2004) Democratic Accountability and Political Effectiveness from a Cosmopolitan Perspective, Government and Opposition 39(2) Dean, J. (2009) Democracy and other neo-liberal fantasies: communicative capitalism and left politics, Durham and London: Duke University Press Dryzek, J. S. (1999) Transnational democracy, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 7(1): 30-51. Held, D. (2006) From City States to a Cosmopolitan Order? in Goodin, R.E. and Pettit, P. (eds) Contemporary Political Philosophy, London: Blackwell, pp. 674-696 Held, David (1995) Democracy and the global order: from the modern state to cosmopolitan governance, Cambridge: Polity, especially chapters 6 and 12. Held, David (1999) The transformation of political community, in I. Shapiro and C. Hacker-Cordon (eds) Democracy's Edges, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Keohane, R. (2001) Governance in a Partially Globalized World, American Political Science Review, 95(1):1-13.

Kymlicka, W. (1999) Citizenship in an Era of Globalization, in I. Shapiro and C. Hacker-Cordon (eds) Democracy's Edges, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp84-111 McGrew, A. (2002) Transnational Democracy: Theories and Prospects, in A. Carter and G. Stokes (eds) Democractic Theory Today, Cambridge, Polity Press, pp.269-294. Nanz, P. and Steffek, J. (2004) Global Governance, Participation and the Public Sphere, Government and Opposition, 39(2):314-336. Roland Axtmann (2002) Whats Wrong with Cosmopolitan Democracy? in Nigel Dower and John Williams, (eds) Global Citizenship: a Critical Reader, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Thompson, D. (1999) Democratic Theory and Global Society, Journal of Political Philosophy, 7(2):111125. Wendt, A. (2003) Why a World State is Inevitable, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.9 (4), pp.491-542.