Global Governance and State Transformation. As if.
July 12, 2010
Globalization is more than just an idea; it is a reality and a way of life. While the notion that globalization seeks only to benefit us all may have pervaded at one point or another, facts also point out that globalization is not a perfect concept. This leads us to delve into the throes of globalization in order to validate the premise that globalization also has its drawbacks. Among the prevailing issues involving globalization, which has a major implication in our present time, is the culmination of the idea of global govern ance.
I read an article by Sassen Saskia entitled. The Participation of States and Citizens in Global Governance. I was supposed to read the article for academic purposes but I personal interest made me read the text again.
Hands off on the academic side of the principles involved in this article, I think what I read is categorized among those things that look good on paper but would ultimately suck when used in a practical setting.
Yeah, indeed, It would suck, big time. (No need to mince words here, tight?)
The idea presented by Saskin is really quite noble and if you are a utopian, you would probably believe that such notions can result to a good outcome. But the thing is, I’m not a utopian. I’m a realist at heart and I believe that the possibility of citizens and states participating in global governance is too farfetched.
The economic meltdown in the US has gravely affected the rest of us. Against that background, how would you expect the citizens and states to prioritize a prosperous means for global governance when the problems that plague us cannot even force us to commit to our responsibilities as a citizen of our own nation?
In the Philippines, participation in national governance alone requires money. Transportation and food when you are lobbying or attending a session is a very simplistic example that we can cite. Then, there’s the problem on bureaucracies. How would you expect the people in power to allow the average individual to have a say in national governance?
The idea that Saskin presents is that state and citizen participation plays a major role in the pursuit for the betterment of global governance. Saskin expresses her belief that by encouraging states and citizens to have a say on the economic affairs of the state and of the global community, state transformation would be well within reach. But how would that state transformation take place if national democratic societies alone are plagued with contradictions? There are too much individual differences, too many voices raised, too many ideals, and not a single, surefire way to resolve conflicts. So where does that leave us?
