|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
135119
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In order to combat governments’ efforts to isolate their people from the outside world, individuals in countries across the globe have developed alternative social media for their fellow citizens. World Policy Journal has identified six alternative social media sites that are engaging locals on a daily basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
136626
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In his seminal work, Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations, Robert W. Cox reflects upon Gramsci’s political ontology. Analyzing how Gramsci reasoned about the relationship between civil society and the state, he explores the ways in which Gramsci’s conceptualization could be adapted to international relations studies. With a particular focus on the concept of hegemony, Cox maintains that just as hegemonic relationships are formed among social classes within the state, similar structures may be found in the larger global framework. By adopting the Coxian approach, this essay attempts to apply Gramsci’s notion of a historical bloc to the analysis of the post-Cold War world order and the rise of China as a viable architect of a new international governance model. It thus maintains that the contemporary global economic and political developments indicate the ongoing formation of an alternative historical bloc which, despite currently falling short of Gramsci’s conceptualization of imminent radical change, signifies major implications for inter-state relations and world peace and security
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
134544
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Moscow appeared to be unprepared for polycentrism as it has not yet grasped its basic rule, which was well known to Russian chancellors of the 19th century: one should make compromises on individual issues in order to have closer relations with other centers of power than they have among themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
135287
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Political cosmopolitanism comes in many different shapes and sizes. Despite its intellectual diversity, cosmopolitanism typically agrees on one crucial matter: any prospective global democracy is best envisioned not in terms of a hierarchical world state, but instead as a multilayered system of global governance resting on an unprecedented dispersion of decision-making authority. In discarding traditional ideas of world government, cosmopolitans typically succumb to a series of mistakes. First, they presuppose unfairly dismissive accounts of world government. Second, they misleadingly contrast their own multilayered and (allegedly) institutionally novel vision to early modern (for example, Hobbesian) ideas of sovereignty, or to Max Weber's influential definition of the modern state. They thus obscure the fact that the modern state's diverse manifestations can only be partly grasped by ideal-types drawn from either Hobbes or Weber. Consequently, they depend on straw person accounts of the modern state. Third, envisioning their proposals as building on the familiar ideal of institutional checks and balances, they misconstrue the contribution that checks and balances can make to global-level democracy. Their hostility to statist ideas about global democracy notwithstanding, their proposals sometimes mimic core attributes of traditional statehood, and they tend inadvertently to ‘bring the state back in’ to global democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
134271
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article is an inquiry into the relationship between diplomacy and public imagination in world politics. Neither the conventional conceptions of diplomacy as the art or practice of negotiations among groups or states, nor more critical meditations on the mediation of conflictual narratives, it is argued, can adequately explain the very subjective foundations of diplomacy as a normative practice in world politics. This glaring oversight is in large part due to the lack of engagement with the varied contours of historical meaning and memory that condition human thoughts and relations in world society. Diplomacy, I argue, is very much implicated in the normative dictates of public imagination: namely, the public understanding of history which arises from the exclusionary—and hence often conflicting—cultural narratives about nationhood, justice, language, rights, personhood, et cetera that remain the perennial facts of human relations in world society. As such, the practice of diplomacy can be reconceived as a paradox: an intervention into, and an enabler of, exclusivist narrations of public imagination in world society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
135227
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Although the prestige of European civilization suffered a body blow in World War I, it took most Europeans longer to realize that their continent was not the center of the world, and longer still to think of a war fought mainly in Europe as a truly global conflict.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
134604
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines political exile as a particular form of migration, with reference to Indonesians living in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) when the military regime came to power in their homeland. With the rise in Jakarta of the New Order under Major-General Suharto after 1 October 1965, thousands of Indonesians in socialist and communist states abroad were effectively isolated. Faced with detention or execution if they returned home, Indonesian leftists and other dissidents who were scattered across some dozen states spanning the Sino-Soviet divide became unwilling exiles. Several thousand Indonesians were then studying in the USSR, where they were one of the largest foreign nationalities in Soviet universities and military academies. Many spent nearly half a century as exiles, struggling to survive first the vicissitudes of the cold war and then the global transformations that came with the dissolution of the USSR in December 1991. The most influential grouping of Indonesians who remained in the USSR after 1965 was known as the Overseas Committee of the Indonesian Communist Party. In China, a separate party leadership emerged, known as the Delegation of the Indonesian Communist Party. Mirroring Sino-Soviet rivalries, the Delegation urged Indonesian leftists in the USSR to join them in China. Hundreds did so. These rival factions were separated by mutual distrust until they each disbanded toward the close of the cold war. This article analyzes the changing fate of Indonesians caught in the contradictory relationship between New Order Indonesia and the USSR and in the tensions between the USSR and China as these unwilling exiles were buffeted by geopolitical transformations well beyond their influence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
136673
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Since coming to power in May 2014, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has undertaken, through a series of high profile foreign visits as well as by hosting many foreign dignitaries, a dynamic and ambitious diplomatic campaign. This is aimed at making India a keystone of the emerging multipolar world order, keeping good and fruitful relations with all sides and promoting the country's economic and strategic interests, while raising its cultural influence and prestige. ASEAN, Australia, China, Israel, Japan, Russia, neighbouring SAARC nations, Pacific Islands states and the US have all been given special attention, though Europe so far seems to have taken a backseat in priorities. Major challenges facing the world community today are international Islamic militancy and the renascent Cold War between the West and a Russo–Chinese alliance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
135146
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Rejecting the various ‘World Order Models’ being projected as a panacea for a lasting peace, Nehru visualised ‘World Union’ based on democratic principles to create an egalitarian social and economic order across the globe and to eliminate the recurring phenomena of conflict and tension which produce wars at regular intervals. The perceived ‘World Government’ could provide a platform to manage and eliminate the modern forms of warfare: ethnic conflicts, proxy wars, militancy, terrorism, etc., while accommodating and redressing the grievances and resentments of specific people across as well as within the borders of national units. A global legislature can provide the community of nations a uniform, codified and effective international legal order. The Nehruvian model which sought to create an egalitarian, ‘planned’ and ‘socialised’ world economic order by eliminating imperialism and colonialism in all forms and manifestations could be relevant to manage the global economic crisis and also for the development of underdeveloped world. A World Union based on democracy and freedom may protect individual and group rights against ethnic cleansings and genocides and may help to universalise the institution of democracy. A strong world government, suggested by Nehru, can control nuclear proliferation and save mankind from the scourge of nuclear war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
134636
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
International development has tended to ignore – or, tellingly, repress – human/social passions. Yet the theory and practice of development is replete with disavowed memories (racism, (neo)colonialism, gender discrimination) and traumatic prohibitions (economic recession, poverty), which show up in dreams and fantasies (the exoticised Third World, structural adjustment as universal panacea), obsessions (economic growth, ‘wars’ against poverty or terror), or stereotypes (denigration, infantilisation, sexualisation or feminisation of the Third World Other). Psychoanalysis aims precisely at helping tease out these passions, that is, the unconscious fantasies and desires embedded in development. It helps explain the gap between development’s scientific commitments (eg belief in progress, neutrality, objectivity, rationality) and its irrational practices (eg the seductive draw of narrow capitalistic growth, the fatal pull to aggressive racism, or the blind conformity to bureaucratic procedures or ethnic/religious identities). It helps us understand that development is not only a socioeconomic construction, but also an ideological construction intent on effacing its various internal traumas and contradictions – for example, the way in which development is “naturally” equated with neoliberal growth and liberal democracy, concealing the reality of rapacious capitalism, growing global inequalities and unevenness, and diminishing avenues for political contestation. The five articles in this sub-theme for Third World Quarterly aim to examine the intersection of psychoanalysis and development, applying in particular (although not exclusively), a Lacanian/Žižekian lens to a range of development issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
135228
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The world ended up with a League that simultaneously normalized international government and privileged the nation-state as the normative form of political sovereignty.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
135147
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article attempts to revisit Nehru’s ideology and to re-contextualise it in an era of globalisation. India has remained the reference point to assess Nehru’s ideology. His idea of nation and nationalism are discussed in the light of the recent attempts to redefine Indian nation and nationalism. Notwithstanding his commitment to secularism, Nehru also attempted to absorb Hindu communalist sentiments in the mainstream of Indian politics but at the same time he treated communalism as a grave threat to India’s integrity. Nehru’s vision to develop modern India not only with the help of science and technology but also by developing a scientific temperament and promoting democratic culture amongst people is the subject of debate. His views regarding the radical transformation of rural society through land reforms and community development programmes are discussed here. Nehru desired to reconcile the modern goals of economic development with traditional community values of small-scale agrarian societies. His contribution to consolidate democracy by gradually attaching the people to parliamentary institutions forms a significant component of this article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
135141
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Contemporary changes in the form of introducing structural reforms in the country and end of the Cold War at the global level have brought about significant transformations and new orientations in India’s domestic and foreign policies. Questions are being raised regarding the relevance of Nehru’s model of development and his foreign policy of non-alignment. Besides, a volatile socio-economic and political scenario in the country and prevailing non-polarity in the international milieu have created a situation of chaos and uncertainty. Hence, it becomes imperative to have a look at Nehru’s visionary philosophy so as to ascertain whether it can provide a solution to the new challenges faced by the country both at the domestic and international levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
135199
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In his classic The Anarchical Society, the scholar Hedley Bull argued that there was a perennial tension in the world between forces of order and forces of disorder, with the details of the balance between them defining each era’s particular character. Sources of order include actors committed to existing international rules and arrangements and to a process for modifying them; sources of disorder include actors who reject those rules and arrangements in principle and feel free to ignore or undermine them. The balance can also be affected by global trends, to varying degrees beyond the control of governments, that create the context for actors’ choices. These days, the balance between order and disorder is shifting toward the latter. Some of the reasons are structural, but some are the result of bad choices made by important players -- and at least some of those can and should be corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|