SS01 SPECIAL SESSION GENERAL POOL GLOBALIZATION: A PHENOMENON THAT BINDS THE THEORY OF DEMOCRACY TO RESTORATION IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF CHANGE IN THE MODERN WORLD By PhD. José Martínez Vilchis. México. Biodata: José Martínez Vilchis holds a doctoral degree in Public Administration at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. Master of Arts Public Administration and in Administration for the Development, as well as a B. A. in Political Sciences and Public Administration. He is a current member of the National System of Researchers of Mexico. At present, he is the Dean of the Autonomous University of the State of Mexico. Title: Globalization: a phenomenon that binds the theory of democracy to restoration in order to understand the nature of change in the modern world Abstract It is a fact that globalization is transforming the world. This has intended a process of world standardization among the States, particularly, in economic matters, and there may be precisely where this phenomenon might have failed. This derives from the fact that Politics" did not arise as much interest from the globalizing process, as the "Economy" did, which in its turn, resulted in a non-evolving Theory of Democracy as the change had been demanding. For that reason, the present work intends to examine the core idea concerning the need of reconstruction of the current Theory of Democracy, which in my point of view must migrate towards a Cosmopolitan Democracy Under this perspective, I consider that the notion of a Cosmopolitan Democracy, would allow to understand in a better way the nature of the change that we are living in the whole world, and hereby to minimize global dissatisfaction. Likewise the development of this cosmopolitan democracy would also facilitate the reconstruction of the main theoretical concepts: freedom, equality, tolerance, pluralism, dialog, majorities, and minorities. 1
INTRODUCTION First of all, we must specify what we understand by democracy in this paper, in order to relate it to the cosmopolitan concept in a direct way. Thus, by democracy we still consider the meaning "Demos" as a synonymous with people and "Kratos" as a synonymous with power, that is to say, democracy means people empowerment essentially. Nevertheless, going beyond the essential meaning of democracy before mentioned, for us democracy also means sharing among the members of a town or community, and this living together is basically characterized by the principles and values of freedom, equality and fraternity. Along those lines, we must also highlight al the beginning of this paper, that the classic theory of democracy is based on theoretical concepts developed by political science, such as: freedom, equality, tolerance, pluralism, dialog, majorities and minorities. In this sense we consider that these concepts, on which the theory of classic democracy is based, must be reconstructed for a new theory of democracy, which from our perspective must take as an axis new supporting elements, such as: RESPECT, DIGNITY AND FRATERNITY. In the light of this, we must indicate that another concept we must clarify is what in this paper will be understood as "Cosmopolitan", in order to develop the analysis about globalization further on, as a phenomenon that compels reconstruction of the theory of democracy. In that sense, we must highlight at first that the word cosmopolitanism etymologically derives from the Greek Kosmopolites, which means citizen of the world. What these visions have in common is the idea that all human beings, without any distinction of nation or of any another type, belong to only one community, and that this community must be cultivated. The different versions of cosmopolitanism appear to be in different key aspects, such as political institutions, moral values, economic market, and culture. Likewise, I consider that we must highlight the fact that the idea of globalizing moral values is very interesting, since the project of giving special importance respect, dignity and fraternity, hardens, as we had mentioned it previously, the intention of complete fulfillment of human rights universally accepted by nations. In this sense, we cannot overlook that the notion entailed in the French motto: Freedom, Equality and Fraternity, became the perfect framework for the sense of belonging to human race; since its ideals were shaped without taking into consideration state borders, and including every single man. 2
Now it is important to mention that within current political cosmopolitanism, we can find enough nuances, thus we have those who defend the idea of international institutions with major competencies but within the present-day logic, others instead call for variants of a world federalism, or a single world state, as Wells, and others that defend the idea of Cosmopolitan Democracy. (Held, 2002). In short, we might state that Held s proposal deals with going further on the following issues: o To extend the systems of account beyond political institutions. o To submit this control to flows that nowadays are handled with political irresponsibility. o To re-articulate the areas of political power, either at national, regional or at global level, to make them more sensitive to wide interesting issues. o To incorporate groups, agencies, associations and organizations of the economy and civil society to the democratic process. In this sense, I believe that we must reflect at first if freedom and equality must be restated around a new theory of democracy. All of this, obviously, within the frame of what might be named in the future as a cosmopolitan democracy. In my point of view, the context of globalization necessarily compels us to rethink the new types of freedom in which we now live, as well as to reconstruct the notion of equality in the 21st century. To what new freedoms I referred to in the previous paragraph? Basically, to those freedoms as the freedom to access to new technologies and the freedom of access to the information world, such as we know it nowadays. This is distinguished remarkably from freedoms such as the one of transit and of expression that were essential in the 20th century. In other words, in the 21st century there exist new types of freedoms that must be regarded in the new theory of the democracy. Has globalization affected anything of what was above mentioned? Essentially, we must declare absolutely it has, since in regard to it we can say that we live in a time of crucial transition; on the one hand, in many places we can observe several trends that seem to form an alliance in order to weaken democracy and responsibility within the nation state. A scenario showing gradual concentration of power on the basis of multinational capital (productive and financial) is clearly perceived. The outcome of this is globalization. 3
DEVELOPMENT At first, we should note that the fundamental essence of this paper is the conscious awareness that freedoms must be reconstructed within a new theory of democracy. This is supported by very clear signs of world widening, such as those that nowadays raise the possibility of holding international referendums, where people would have their say about the differences that may exist between the priorities in the implementation of democratic cosmopolitan rights, and the objectives of public spending. Moreover, this also raises the possibility of opening international organizations and international functional bodies for accountability. Besides, it is already recognized the need for implementing an assembly that would bring together all democratic States and Agencies, with a real capacity for political action, where its members are directly elected and controlled by people. Now, in regard to the issue of equality, from our perspective we believe that globalization requires that the notion of equality is reconstructed from a new theory of democracy that takes into account that democracy thus requires emancipated, participative individuals, and to some extent, warring, but not praised themselves, either in a visible or in a concealed way, and no doubt that all of this passes through the border of a new conceptualization of "equality" in the context of the twenty-first century. Together with this, we should recognize that tolerance and pluralism are also part of what must be rebuilt in a new theory of democracy, regarding the changes that seem to put us around the edge of the globalization we are undergoing, since today's democratic government is not about being the most effective. This is the one that wholly satisfies the aspirations of freedom and equality. Along these lines, the phenomenon of globalization compels the reconstruction of the theory of democracy, since nowadays we are perfectly aware that elements such as tolerance and pluralism are vital for living together in society. These issues and situations were not foreseen by the market evidently, since if it were a matter of results, dictatorship might be preferable to democracy. Education is the one that should be concerned with procedure education, ways of behaving and making decisions (like stop talking or demand equal treatment), are particularly even more important for social interaction that the outcome, and that democracy as an end is desirable. That is why we urge a reconstruction of the main theoretical concepts of a political nature that we know today. In the light of this, in fact, we make that liberty and equality are not absolute values This means that the limit of one is in the other, as we have seen, but the border of both is in human dignity, our status as individuals, not as manipulated objects. 4
That is precisely where a new theory of democracy must take part in the twentyfirst century. But, what do I mean by this? In short, clear and simple words, I am stating specifically that the new theory of democracy, in no way can conceive its main theoretical concepts as absolute values or concepts. But, just as globalization is based on the intercom, free markets and international relations, in the same way, the main theoretical concepts mentioned above should relate to one another with fully integrated features. Now, it is a fact that the basis of the above is the dignity of man. That is first and foremost, we must treat ourselves as we are: "human beings." Even democracy has to wonder if it has always respected this single absolute value. (Bilbeny, 1999 :48-49). Essentially, the key to the new theory of democracy must reside in the following sentence: Treat people as people and not as objects, because if you treat them as manipulable objects, you will make a big mistake against their human dignity. Remember that people are human, not manipulable objects. In short, offer a humane treatment to people. It is a fact that reconstructing the new theory of democracy entails taking into account that the core of its restatement is that the dialogue between majorities and minorities must work on the basis of humane treatment. This means that the dialogue between minorities and majorities should start from the premise that the development of democracy is not a goal that emerges, but is a part of a deeper historical process. This process involves a line of progress and humanization within the dynamics of civilizations, with a specific recognition of the dignity of the human person and of practical application of the values of freedom and equality in society. This means that the dialogue between minorities and majorities should start from the premise that the development of democracy is not a goal that emerges, but is a part of a deeper historical process. This process involves a line of progress and humanization within the dynamics of civilizations, with a specific recognition of the dignity of the human person and of practical application of the values of freedom and equality in society. To elaborate a reformulation of the theory of democracy is necessary to acknowledge that the democratic process has taken place in parallel to an evolution of the legal concept first and then of the politics, until modern approaches in the prime of social citizenship, under which the guarantee of welfare conditions, equal opportunities, can make way for a broader and complete citizen participation. In this dynamics, it is important to note that democracy is explained as a form of State in which everyone is free, in which you can breathe in freedom and is free of 5
any obstacle. In the light of this, the reconstruction of a new theory of democracy should inexcusably foresee how to strengthen communication channels or even create new forms of dialogue between majorities and minorities. For that reason, it is important to mention that in regard to the principles of positivism in the Right and of legality in the social and political organization, the development of oriented conceptions to support the Right and the State on the people, as well as the humanization of the social relations and the establishment of a general criterion of justice (equitas), were remarkable steps in the sociopolitical process that we are considering here (Fèlix,2002:30-311) It is in this perspective indeed, that political experts must acknowledge that as far as the economy overlooked the vital function and importance that political sciences play in the social relations; it is also very important to recognize that on many occasions we considered ourselves that politics has relevance far beyond the Right. The consequences of all of this are doubtless seen nowadays in the breakdowns that the State of right has undergone in many parts of the world, resulting mostly, in the prevalence of the law of jungle. It is a fact that this reaction is caused by the lack of hierarchical structuring and respect towards the legal norms, and it is our responsibility to accept our share of that problem. On the other hand, we must mention that some legal theorists state that individual s freedom is essentially impossible, since it decreases in importance gradually before the social community freedom. The protest against the one s power that is not different from the others determines a switch in the political consciousness, a drift of the power subject Essential even in democracy by means of the creation of the anonymous personality of the state attached to the empire but not to a physical person (Kelsen, 1992:15-28) This could nowadays be very questionable mainly in most governments of great part of the American continent, where the presidential figure commonly acquires more force and has more weight than some legal orderings. Furthermore, we cannot overlook that in the internationalization of the political decision-making process, numerous institutions have been created in the last century, which foster relations among countries, and regulate certain aspects that in certain cases can become controversial or authoritarian, as it is the case of the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund, whose motto declares to contribute to the development of the less developed countries, what they actually do is to impose their criteria even though these cannot be adapted to each country member. 6
This is precisely where we definitely have to speak out, stating clearly that in many countries, we do not want this kind of globalization. Summarizing, as an early conclusion regarding the new theory of democracy, we must point out that we consider a new cosmopolitan democracy, though ultimately it might be ideal; however, many nations do not long for the kind of democracy that so far the IMF and the World Bank have in mind, which in short is a market democracy. In accordance with that, we think that the new theory of democracy has to consider first of all, that rather than a market democracy, we need a democracy with humane appearances and later on a political democracy; and on the basis of the accomplishment of this described order, we could start thinking about other elements. That is the reality we are currently facing, either we like it or not. We have stated this because a scenario showing progressive concentration of power on the base of multinational capital (productive and financial) is clearly observed, a new agreement between the executive authorities of the main governments as well as an increasing influence of the G7. This situation can not continue just like this, giving priority to the economic interests of a few States, since circumstances such as the influenza virus ephidemic lived in Mexico, shows that under analog conditions, material aspects little help and what actually matters are humanitarian issues. That is why the construction of a new theory of democracy must take into account the variables just mentioned, in such a way that once being in the correct path, we can head for an authentic cosmopolitan democracy; since the real drive for cosmopolitan democracy is the creation of new political institutions that coexist with the system of states, but would invalidate the scope of activities clearly outlined, if their consequences had a transnational and international impact. The viability of democracy nowadays goes through a broader framework of democratic institutions or agencies. (Held, 2001:394-395). In the light of all of this, we have reached the following early conclusions: At first, we must point out that globalization failed at the moment of trying to globalize only the economic aspects, leaving aside the social aspects such as politics. Moreover, we must admit that the theory of democracy has stagnated; therein it is necessary to reconstruct the existing theory of democracy. It is a fact that the traditional theory of democracy must move towards a theory of cosmopolitan democracy, since we believe that this would minimize the overall 7
dissatisfaction, being this, the main reason for gathering here in this world congress of political sciences. Furthermore, we consider as a need to reconstruct the main theoretical concepts of political democracy such as freedom, equality, tolerance, pluralism and dialogue of majorities and minorities in the light of the possibility of a new cosmopolitan democracy. Educating people in favor of getting a global citizenship comes out to be a key aspect supporting the consolidation of an authentic cosmopolitan democracy in the near future. In times of globalization, education towards a global citizenship appears to be a powerful instrument of social transformation. This citizenship is based on strategies that help most underprivileged groups in society to examine how globalization affects the social structure and develop the necessary capabilities to achieve their goals successfully. Consequently, it is very important that the most advantaged, the so-called first world countries, contribute to plans and projects in order to help less advantaged countries to develop the required capabilities so as to make the idea of global democracy come true. Now it is important to mention that there is no better way to achieve the above objective than education, since this will foster values and principles forever, and especially, it will contribute to make them understandable and thus will raise awareness among people about the great importance of treating others with dignity, as a principle. In regard to this, it is unbelievable that we should admit that what the world needs at present is a way of thinking and conceiving the world as in Florence, Italy in the years 1450-1550; this is the Renaissance epoch; in which the holistic vision of life allowed humanity to live one of the most influential periods in the history of mankind. Moreover, it is essential to indicate that it is also necessary to modify the way of perceiving knowledge. In a world characterized by complexity, rapid change and unpredictability, it is important to overcome the division of knowledge in areas such as language, mathematics and social sciences and refer to them in the light of a more integrative, comprehensive perspective. In this sense, it is precisely from my perspective the opportunity that nowadays can provide us the cosmopolitan democracy, a new rebirth in the XXI century. This is why it is urgent to work in the reconstruction of the theory of democracy. We should also be noted that as the foundation for the reconstruction of the theory of democracy, human rights are the ones who should play the main role. No doubt of it, because until it gets to the full implementation of human rights, there is no 8
point in even talking about what types of political systems are the best, because the reality is that you can not think of computers when have not met the basic needs of human beings. It is vital that in addition to taking into account civil society, we take into account the fundamental rights transnational valid in which the cosmopolitan democracy. This is because particular attention to the transformations that the theory of international relations has occurred in the concept of war. We could demonstrate that the unipolar world in which we find ourselves, is characterized as a risky place fuzzy limits In this regard we must note that in the midst of the debate can not ignore that the third world scholars the question of territory has become a major cultural importance, as the subjectivity and ungovernability creative arts, the media and cultural production and prevent the manipulation cultural homogenization. This means simply that globalization in Latin America is impossible to arrive at terms that are referred to the IMF and the World Bank, as at least in Latin America live local realities, which means that if it has reached a level of globalization in Latin America is kind of like: Globalization or Globalization in Mexico to Argentina, to name a few. On all the above might say that political globalization is the institutionalization of international political structures. It is a fact that competition policy in an interstate system requires no consensus among states, nor a cultural agreement to operate consistently between them. However, European states were the first to create a set of rules that have been operating interstate and have achieved an international consensus standards, to establish an order, a series of structures designed to regulate the interactions between various social subjects (Cohen, 2005:31) Along these lines, we must mention that with regard to everything outlined in this paper In principle I should note that actually believe that globalization is an inevitable phenomenon and as such must be addressed, since it is optional to give a response to that situation. In this dynamic is that I believe that in effect is an immediate need to work on rebuilding a new theory of democracy, because that would lay the foundation in the theoretical aspects, and then step into reality This, in essence what we want to emphasize is that what in principle is needed to see something done in everyday life, are developing plans or the guide of what is to be done. That is why the reconstruction of the theory of democracy within the context of globalization is needed. This is due to perform obtaining a new consensus of the community of political scientists around the world. Why the 9
conclusions reached in this thematic area of the World Congress of Political Science, will be critical to the reformulation of a new theory of democracy. Finally we must point out without the need for alarm, but because of the magnitude of the forum where we are, we need not stop to overlook the issue of global insecurity, as it is a reality that affects us all States Orbe. I should mention that someone has defined fanaticism as redoubling efforts when it has lost sight of the original. The blind pursuit of national security fits perfectly with this definition of fanaticism. As leaders of the state invest more and more political, economic and human arms, aid programs, partnerships, and resource exploitation, the fact is that seems to decrease the security of individuals, societies and planet as a whole. In the industrialized, technologically advanced, insecurity is reflected mainly in an acute anxiety about the arms race as well as the frustrations caused by both capitalism and for socialism to provide a new life, than to change of a high social cost and environmental (Gurtov,1990:14) All the above mentioned derives from the fact that we live in times of "ongoing uncertainty", which means we must immediately change the scope from which we are planning our social systems, since it is a undeniable true that all the resources we have invested in the political and economic issues are not granting stability. The latter is the key to regain welfare rates lost around the world. Perhaps it is high time we said we need people with less material goods and less money, but with more mental and physical health, and above all, with large humanistic sense. It is a reality dear friends. We have lost the compass. And, in favor of getting back to the right path, which by the way means no more than the retrieval of common sense as global society; political scientists are compelled to contribute to the rerouting of our corresponding societies, since our education does not only enable but compels us to do so. CONCLUSIONS At first, we should point out that globalization failed when trying to globalize only the economic aspects, leaving aside the social aspects such as politics. On the other hand we must recognize that the theory of democracy has stagnated, therein it is necessary to reconstruct the existing theory of democracy. It is a fact that the traditional theory of democracy must move towards a theory of cosmopolitan democracy, since we believe that this would minimize the overall 10
dissatisfaction, which is the main reason for being together in this world congress of political sciences. Moreover, we consider essential to reconstruct the main theoretical concepts of political democracy such as freedom, equality, tolerance, pluralism and dialogue of majorities and minorities, in the light of a new possible cosmopolitan democracy. We must highlight that globalization is an unavoidable phenomenon and it must be faced as such, since it is optional to respond to that circumstance. In this sense, I believe that it is essential to work on rebuilding a new theory of democracy as soon as possible, since this would lay the theoretical foundations, in order to step into reality later on. It is undesirable to continue prioritizing the economic interests of a few States, since circumstances, such as the influenza virus epidemic undergone in Mexico, shows that under analog conditions, material aspects little help, and what really matters are authentic humanitarian issues. We must admit that we live in times of "ongoing uncertainty", which means we must immediately change the scope on which we design our social systems, since it is a fact that all the resources we have invested in political and economic issues are not granting stability. This last word is the key to regain welfare rates lost around the world. Perhaps it is high time we said we need people with less material goods and less money, but with more mental and physical health, and above all, with large humanistic sense. Finally, I should emphasize that this is a reality dear friends. We have lost the compass. And, in favor of getting back to the right path, which by the way means no more than the retrieval of common sense as global society; political scientists are compelled to contribute to the re-routing of our corresponding societies, since our education does not only enable but compels us to do so. REFERENCES Beck Ulrich. Democracia cosmopolita. En: http://www.redfilosofica.de/beck2002.html. Bilbeny, Norbert. Democracia para la diversidad. Barcelona. Ed. Ariel.1999. Cohen, Miriam. Democracia y desafío medioambiental en México. Riesgos, retos y opciones en la nueva era de la globalización. Barcelona. Ed. Pomares y UAM Azcapotzalco. 2005. Declaración universal sobre la democracia. Adoptada por el Consejo Interparlamentario en su 161 sesión. El Cairo, Egipto, Septiembre de 1997. 11
Félix Tezanos, José. La democracia incompleta. El futuro de la democracia postliberal. Madrid. Ed. Biblioteca Nueva.2002. Gurtov, Mel. Política humanista global. Barcelona. Ed. Pomares-corredor. 1990 Held, David. Democracia. En: http://www.monografias.com/trabajos37/democracia-david-held/democraciadavidheld.shtrnl. 2002. Held, David. La democracia y el orden global. Del Estado moderno al gobierno cosmopolita. Barcelona.. Ed. Paídos. 1997. Held, David. Modelos de Democracia. Madrid. Ed. Alianza ensayo. 2001. Kelsen, Hans. Esencia y valor de la democracia. México. Ed. Colofón.1992. Lull, James. Medios, comunicación, cultura. Aproximación global. Argentina. Ed. Amorrortu editores. 1997. Magdaleno, Evelyn. Podemos hablar de democracia cosmopolita. En: http://www.politicapublica.cl/2007/09/06/%c2%bfpodemos-hablar-de-democracia cosmopolita-por-evelyn-magdaleno/. 2007. Mesa Manuela. Educar para la ciudadanía global y la democracia cosmopolita. En: http://www.globalactionpw.org/who/educar_ciudadania_global_y_la_democracia_c osmopolita.pdf. Patrici, Nicolás. Teoría de los grandes espacios ó democracia cosmopolita. En: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/10/93/33/pdf/patrici.pdf. 2002. 12