The new world order

Our world is getting meaner and as we have reached the new millennium, ideas about collective ways of solving social problems have lost ground to arguments that the rules of competition are inevitable in the face of globalization. The apparent inevitability of a meaner world is reinforced by the remarkable ideological convergence of political and economic institutions around the world. Where diversity in economic and political institutions was once tolerated, uniformity is now demanded by international institutions. Globalization provides a view of the world in which the interests of the powerful are defined as necessity, while the demands of the poor appear as greed which undermines economic success. The ideology that underpins globalization focuses on trade as the vehicle for improving the conditions of people everywhere. It is an old idea which sees the increasing integration of international economies as a positive step and one which would inevitably occur, if markets are not unduly hampered by governments. The restructuring associated with globalization doesn't even attempt to promise anything to those traditionally disadvantaged in our society: the unemployed cannot expect jobs, the poor cannot expect prosperity, and women and other disadvantaged people cannot expect equality.

The justification for economic change focuses solely on the competitive benefits for businesses that operate and compete internationally. Throughout the process of globalization the nation state has shifted its role from one which at least tempered the ability of the rich and powerful to dominate, to one which followed the path of least difficulty, by championing mainly the interests of the powerful. The changing nature of the state (or government) was itself made possible by the conditioning framework put in place by international political institutions. States are accepting and even actively pursuing globalization because international corporations want to create conditions for the free movement of capital, unfettered by the ability of nation states to inhibit business transactions. The world is being shaped to meet this need for predictable, market-friendly conditions wherever corporations and investors choose to operate.

The main point to understand from this is that the international economy has been designed with these giant players in mind and the new rules for action accommodate their best interests. Within industrialized nations, the ability of the state to control the actions of corporations appears to have been seriously restricted by the new international context of globalization. The great advantage of the new international rules of trade to multinational corporations is their ability to escape regulation of nation states. The trade agreements work toward establishing one giant global market, while, at the same time, limiting the role of the supranational institutions to market-creating activities.

Unlike the work of nation states, which over time have developed institutions either to correct the economy when the market did not function in an optimal way, such as during times of depression, or to control business, such as through labour or environmental legislation, the international replacements that are being created neither exert discipline on the market nor function as instruments of market-correction. These functions are still the responsibility of nations, but as multinational corporations become more mobile, the ability of corporations to escape the regulation of states increases. As nations compete with each other to have businesses locate in their own countries, the ability to control corporate activity comes into direct conflict with the increased mobility of these corporations. Unless nations agree to behave in the same way with regard to corporate behaviour, the corporations will not be disciplined in any serious way. Any one nation, by insisting on greater standards of corporate behaviour, will be disadvantaged and its corporations will claim that they are being made uncompetitive relative to other corporations in the international market. Since there is no mechanism for nations to act collectively, individual state action is critically weakened.

The new international trade agreements have facilitated the creation of a single market, without a single state to regulate it. In this sense, the growth in power of the corporate sector places nations in about the same stage of control over capital as they had at the dawn of the industrial revolution. Our national institutions are not equipped to cope with the nature of the changes which have taken place. The important point, however, is not that these changes in the control over capital were inevitable, but that the corporate sector worked hard over the years to see that they would occur.

7. Answer the following questions:

1. Why is a meaner world inevitable?

2. Why is uniformity now demanded by international institutions?

3. What is the focus of the present day ideology?

4. Can all people expect equality in the modern world?

5. In what way has the nation state shifted its role?

6. What do the trade agreements work toward?

7. Why are states accepting and actively pursuing globalization?

8. What makes corporations to start business in certain countries?

9. What has facilitated the creation of a single market?

8. Find English equivalents in the text:

Решение социальных проблем; правила конкуренции; слияние политических и экономических институтов; подрывать экономический успех; средство улучшения условий жизни; свободное движение капитала; ограничивать роль наднациональных органов власти; размещать предприятия; торговые соглашения; на заре промышленной революции; единое рыночное пространоство.

9. Find the words in the text according to their definitions:

1. cruel and violent or mot wanting to spend money

2. impossible to avoid or prevent

3. a situation in which people or things gradually become the same or very similar

4. a very firm statement that you want smth

5. to happen, especially unexpectedly

6. to make it difficult to start or continue in a normal way

7. to provide enough space

8. an official rule that controls the way things are done

9. to make it possible or easier for smth to happen

10. to deal successfully with a difficult situation or job

10. Match the columns:

1. The models of democracy are … by the principles a) coincided

of “government ‘for’ or ‘by’ people”.

2. Direct democracy was achieved in Athens by b) offered, resistance

Mass … in solution of disputes.

3. Universal suffrage was not established in the UK c) participation

Until 1928, since then women have no longer been

Deprived of their … in politics.

4. The programme was too much time … d) regardless of

5. … of such high-technological equipment requires e) undergone

great expenses.

6. More narrowly pluralism … to a theory of the f) involvement

distribution of political power.

7. There continues to be … about the term “pluralism” g) consuming

as there are still different approaches to the problem.

8. The island … for about seven miles. h) pursuing

9. The word “politics” … in Ancient Greece, i) determined

literally meaning city-state.