Global Reform is Punditry on Deaf Ears

Sep 11, 2014 Bhattarai Chiranjeevi Politics 0

Marshall McLuhan predicted a globe that is connected via electric and electronic technologies foremost of which is the Internet. The term global village has always been loosely attributed to his ideas as he went as far as predicting the rise of sociocultural clusters and unified international communities that will be interconnected through the Internet. Akin to the concept of the global village is the controversial notion of globalization that espouses international integration and interdependence in trade, culture, and other aspects. Imagine a single world society.

Reference image: IDS UK

However, political, economic, and social clashes in history, even just recent history, are proof that there cannot be a worldwide tribal mindset. The global village is a myth.

The historical beginnings of globalization, as the term came to be used in modern era, are debatable. If they were to be specific about it, economic scholars date back its origins to the trade links between the Indus Valley and Sumerian civilizations in the 3^rd millennium B.C. Through the eons, trade and cultural interconnection has been possible, but it never unified the majority of the planet. This is because an interconnection between large groups of people always gives rise to the unevenness in relations. Thus, the emergence of hegemons and the geopolitical subordinate states in the global theater became globalization’s undoing.

Hypercapitalism and increase in trade interdependence gave rise to adverse effects such as extreme urbanization and climate change. When globalization started to unravel, there arose a need for global reform. The 21^st century global problems, arguably the sins of globalization, such as major economic meltdowns, the occurrence of pandemics, rise of terrorism, creation of weapons of mass destruction, and climate change had to be undone. Experts have deemed that the solutions will also need global proportions. United it stood, united it fell, and then united it should heal through corresponding global reforms. However and yet again, global reform is another myth. It is a clarion call that falls on deaf ears. Some cries are shrill but frequencies are down in the ears of the intended.

Inherently Flawed Concept

Global reform entails global governance which is exactly the worm in the apple of the globalization concept. Governance is operationally political in nature and the political play is precisely the hegemonic ploy of the powerful ones in the equation. Global governance, if it were to be effective, entails an international agenda which again can be tainted and skewed in favor of the powerful. More international laws need to be enacted, but not everyone will want to be legally bound to these legislative systems. Global governance also needs an even further economic interdependence because the operation of reforms needs shared resources.

Safety and Security Regional Hotspots

While security is a global concern, safety is often regional in scope. Security problems may cross geographical borders and affect the world, in general, but hotspots necessitate regional solutions. This is because sustainable solutions to breaches in security and safety call for unique and respective cultural strategies. Such phenomena as terrorism and piracy, for example, will need to be addressed within the context of such regional considerations as religion, ideology, economy, and government. Most safety and security problems are often the result of conflicts in the region. Moreover, while transnational crime can dissolve geographical borders, solutions are dependent on the intricacies of culture. Reform needed to address raging security issues needs regional attention and cultural sensitivity. While major governments in the West strongly yield their military intervention and reform, they end up aggravating the regional crises instead of alleviating the tension.

Ineffectiveness of the United Nations

The UN is tasked to be a multilateral forum that is supposed to tackle the most pressing challenges in the world today. Reforms instituted by the body are rendered handicapped by such factors as sacrosanct sovereignty of some of a few member states, as well as an organizational culture whose emphasis on process delays results. The failure to achieve a concerted effort to mitigate global warming and climate change is one of the more pronounced examples of the body’s ineffectiveness. This is largely because the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN body created to validate climate change information, is an intergovernment political body. The role of the elite member nations of the UN taints the body with allegations of self-serving agenda in global governance.

The much-celebrated concept of globalization fizzled out after a while because its adverse effects reared their ugly head much too soon. The notion of global reform hasn’t exactly caught fire in global circles, either. This is probably because there is hardly any evidence that a piece of global reform has ever been successful, much less carried out. More and more, people are going back to thinking locally, solving crises regionally, and prospering on their own without complete dependence on the erstwhile pompous concept of a global system. Thus, global reform has become a mere fodder to the punditry of vacuous expertise.