Understanding Society, Regimes, and Power in Global Relations
Understanding Society, Regimes, and Power
Norbert Elias, a sociologist, in 1987 announced the concept of the society of individuals. Over the years, flows are increasing, and we have more access to information from all over the world, allowing us to create our own identity. Before, we only learned from family and school. Today, we also learn from television and the Internet. According to Elias, this means that increasingly having the feeling of being part of a global society has created this sense that individuals feel more able to influence a social environment. As the circle is very large, growing impotence arises (e.g., What can we do for the victims of Gaza?). You can feel identified but cannot influence. This impotence leads people to the great problem of globalization: the search for a new identity. The individual has the need to feel part of any place, of something, referring not only to political identity but also cultural, social, etc.
Regime Theory (R. Axelrod)
In the 80s, the realist paradigm prevailed, dealing with classical terms of realism. It is a theory formulated by Axelrod, with the collaboration of D. Krashen in 1982. It is a set of norms, shared culture, marking a way, some parameters in international relations. Realists are not going to put the state under international regulations. The theory of international government is replaced by a government report (governance). There is nothing formed; they are covenants. It distinguishes between:
GOVERNMENT: Institutionalized relations between the states approach the idea of a world state. Example: Treaties, UN… / GOVERNANCE: Talk of schemes, non-institutionalized elements. Example: G-7, there is no mandate, no law in the dust… The difference between the more formal vision, legal (government) and informal vision of global governance (governance). Success between governance is that it is recognized as such after the fall of the Berlin Wall began to respect and speak more clearly has the vision informal.
There is a classification of schemes:
- Principles: International relations assumes that there are factors shared by the states.
- Principle of reciprocity: What one state does for another, the other does in return; what one prohibits, the other prohibits. Reciprocity. When this is broken, serious problems occur, and states are not treated equally.
- Rules: International legal formalization. E.g., treaties, charters…
- Procedures: Way of making decisions, consensus. E.g., negotiations of Spain in the EU.
- Rules: Agreements on a very specific point. Legal formalization of specific topics in international relations. E.g., banning the use of mustard gas, anti-personnel mines. There is an implicit agreement not to use them. Sectoral agreements.
Realist Tradition (Hobbes)
The only actors in international relations are states, living in a state of anarchy. War is a normal activity (a fight among the states for being above). Political prominence of the states, pulse between politics and economics. The only possibility is the hierarchy order (polar, with a single power or multipolar). International politics was simply a clash of interests. Part of a moral consideration that man is selfish and always defends their own interests. They’re really pessimistic about human nature and do not try to change it. Peace, meanwhile, is nothing but a recovery period between the wars.
Hard Power vs. Soft Power
Hard power: military, economic…
Soft power: cultural values, what makes countries want to imitate you, want to be like you, and take you as a reference.
World Society
World society is totally different from the previous one. It has a way of seeing international relations, from a utopian root that leads to Kant’s conception of world government. Main ideas:
- Defense of civil society against political authorities (autonomy of the citizen to the state). The state is not the central actor. The aim is to enable citizens to meet their demands.
- Anti-violence stance.
- Condemnation of violence between states and a rejection of war as a last resort. Currently in Europe, we have been in a period of peace since 1945 (although we must take into account the war in the Balkans). Currently, the concept of peace is evolving (and not only the interwar period). The final order of this world society is to consider war as an illegal act.