THINK LOCAL, ACT GLOBAL
Beyond the nation-state
The Exam
The exam is three hours long and will be held on campus between the 28th of April and 16th of May (the module ends on the 26th March)
There will be ten questions, one from each lecture
There will be some cross-over between topics
Each question begins with ‘To what extent…’
What do I want?
The most important thing is to demonstrate a CRITICAL understanding of globalisation
Showing this understanding is much more important than remembering facts – but you will need to read to increase your understanding
Being critical requires you to evaluate different sides of an argument in order to develop your position, as well as integrating information from different parts of the module
Today
Introducing the nation and national identity
Imagining national communities
Your questions
The nation-state and the threat of globalisation
Our Progress 
Last week we discussed the idea that our local circumstances are increasingly influenced by global social structures

Today we consider whether the nation, as a particularly strong form of local identification, is threatened by changes in global social structures
To what extent is the nation-state relevant in the 21st century?
Defining the nation
‘Nations’ are a people with a shared identity, usually based on common geography
Nations differ from ethnic groups because they seek political autonomy as well as cultural unity
Nations produce social solidarity through belonging and identification
What is your nationality?
Nationhood and identity
Social identity: A socially attributed identity or label that is applied to an individual and has a structuring influence over them (how are we the same as others)
‘We British like to…’
Social identities produce a sense of belonging through an identification with a group
We can have multiple and competing social identities, of which national identity is one, and the composition of these competing identities make up our sense of self
Is your nationality important to you?
An imagined community
National identities are not naturally produced, but are socially constructed – nations are built, not born
Benedict Anderson (1991) argued that the nation was an ‘imagined community’ that is inherently limited and sovereign
Nations are imagined because we will never meet all the members of the nation, but members still have an ‘image of their communion’ (p.6)
Limited Sovereign Communities (p.6)
Nations are imagined to be limited because they establish ideological and physical boundaries from others
Nations are imagined to be sovereign because they have rule over themselves (or aspire to)
Nations are imagined as a community because of the inherent comradeship between members
This imaginary is based upon an identification with symbols that allow for the construction of a common identity and common bond with other people
Being Kiwi
What symbols define your nationhood?
Constructing Imagination
Whilst our national imaginations are based on shared symbols and ideas, they cannot be fixed
National identity is always in flux – What defines ‘us’ from ‘them’
As a consequence, national identity is strongly influenced by global structural shifts
Conversely, national identities are often firm emotional attachments
Why are we more passionate about nationhood than other aspects of our identities?
Nationalism
Nationalism is the desire of a people to assert their autonomy, identity and unity
A patriotic identification with the nation over other forms of identity, particularly divisive ones
‘We are all English’
Nationalism is a powerful tool for achieving social solidarity and mediating against social divisions and conflict
Today we discuss what happens when our emotional attachments to our identification with an imagined shared, limited and sovereign community are threatened
What do you want to know?
Challenging the nation
Whilst nationhood provides a powerful sense of identity for some, and a common bond between many, it has come under threat from a number of sources:
The emergence of global political and economic institutions The spread of global cultures The presence of multiple national identities within a nationstate A return to localist politics
These factors challenge both the way we think of ourselves and the way our lives are organised through the nationstate
Nations and states
Nations might be imagined, but they are also formally constructed
Modern nations are generally coupled with states (the nation-state)
Nations are cultural constructions, states are political institutions
The ideal of a nation-state is that a common people living in proximity to each other should have political autonomy
The State
States are primarily defined by their monopoly over physical force within a given territory based on a centralised authority
Weber: ‘A human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory’
The use of force is vital to the nationstate: It is the local state who is responsible for enforcing laws, no matter how they are created
State and agency
As a social/political structure, states have a significant impact on our capacity for agency
The organisation of the state impacts on who is able to be ‘free’ and act on their own choices
How are resources distributed? Under what rules is society managed? Who has the power to make decisions? What happens to those who disobey?
Global institutions, economic forces and cultural factors impact on the state’s capacity to influence our lives
The Nation State
The nation-state is a relatively recent invention, one that came out of the global spread of empires
With the autonomy of the nation-state, however, came the clash of nation-states and the need to establish systems for controlling the actions of nations
In the idea of the ‘social contract’, individuals within a nation give up power to the state – a similar system applies to states themselves
The need for this global social contract emerged after the horrors of World War I
Global Institutions
The most prominent political institutions were the ‘League of Nations’, constructed after World War I, and the subsequent ‘United Nations’
These institutions attempt to maintain global order and negotiate common ground between states
As we will discuss next week, a global economic system was also created to ensure that everyone played to the same ‘rules’, often giving power to global corporations over local states
Principles The UN has four main purposes To keep peace throughout the world; To develop friendly relations among nations; To help nations work together to improve the lives of poor people, to conquer hunger, disease and illiteracy, and to encourage respect for each other’s rights and freedoms; To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations to achieve these goals.
The Security Council
Whilst the general assembly of the UN can only make recommendations, a ‘Security Council’ can make binding decisions
The Security Council has 15 members, with five permanent members: China, France, Russia, the UK and the US
These permanent members can ‘veto’ any binding decision
Some nations are more equal
The permanent members of the Security Council, all of whom are nuclear powers, are able act on their exclusive interests
Permanent members of the Council are able to protect their national and ideological interests The US has vetoed 32 resolutions critical of Israel
As any one of the divergent nations can veto a motion, the security council is naturally conservative
Whilst global institutions may appear neutral, some nations have much stronger influence over other nations
Consequently, some ‘distant localities’ become more global than others
Should bigger nations have more say in global affairs?
Cultural Spread
As we will discuss further in Weeks 4 and 5, these global institutions are not neutral, but represent the spread of localised values – primarily American
American values have become dominant through both practical factors – the power of the US Dollar, military support – and through the spread of US entertainment media and ideology
As a consequent, local nations, and identities, have become threatened by a foreign culture
A similar threat in the UK is perceived to come from the European Union
Britain and the EU
Regional organisations have also developed alongside global institutions
Britain is part of the European Union, a block of 28 nations, which was constructed in the latter half of the 20th century
The European Union established free movement of peoples, capital, goods and services
This requires the UK to give up some power to the EU: Britain contributes around £4billion a year to the EU and about 15% of all British laws stem from the EU
By far the most controversial of these is the European Court of Human Rights
European Court of Human Rights
Established in 1949 by the ‘Council of Europe’ in the first post-war attempt to unify Europe
Individuals in the UK have the right to take cases to the court and the court has jurisdiction in the UK
There has arisen ‘moral panic’ over the ability of the court to make rulings in the UK, such as over prisoners voting or asylum cases
This is an issue at the heart of globalisation: should global institutions be able to enforce cultural values on others who do not have any power over these decisions?
Are you a European?
What political institutions do you have power over?
The challenge of local culture
The increased influence of global factors on local lives has generated strong local resistance and moves to restore local sovereignty
A number of ‘nations’ such as Scotland and Catalonia, are seeking to become independent
Nationalist movements within nations, such as the British National Party, the English Defence League (EDL) and the UK Independence Party (UKIP), have rallied against global and regional influences, particularly migration and distant governing institutions
National Instinct
These movements reject the influence of ‘non-representative’ institutions in the name of an imagined peoples
“We believe in the right of the people of the UK to govern ourselves, rather than be governed by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels (and, increasingly, in London and even your local town hall)” “The EDL believes that English Culture has the right to exist and prosper in England”
This is a return to ‘primordial’ nationalism that implies that nations are rooted in biological similarities, geography and heritage
Nationalist’s argue that the ‘true’ nation is being undermined by institutions that do not represent the will of the people, as well as intruders who threaten our existing sense of nationhood
National solidarity
Those who live close to each other are expected to share common values
Without any cultural commonality, social relations are often defined by conflict over the right way to do things, or who benefits from existing arrangements
Whilst common points of identification can operate on a micro level, they are encouraged to extend to coincide with legal geographical boundaries
0 Colombia
Cyprus (Non-‌
Zimbabwe
Austria
Iraq
Latvia
Korea (South)
Slovakia
Malaysia
Nepal
Mauritius
Iran
Netherlands
Canada
Russia
Greece
Hungary
Afghanistan
tish Indian Ocean‌
New Zealand
Sweden
Ghana
Philippines
Bulgaria
Brazil
Somalia
Japan
Turkey
Jamaica
China
Spain
South Africa
Sri Lanka
Australia
Pakistan
Bangladesh
United States
Romania
Germany
Italy
Portugal
Nigeria
Lithuania
France
Ireland
India
Poland
Non-UK Population in London by Nationality
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
The aliens amongst ‘us’
Immigrants from distant localities can bring the global into the local
Immigrants come to embody the threat of globalisation and different values and lifestyle: our imagined communities are no longer limited
As a consequence, many people attempt to reestablish the limits on who belongs
Politicians often seek to return to achieve this through devices like citizenship tests and returning political control to the state
The ‘Cricket Test’
“A large proportion of Britain's Asian population fail to pass the cricket test. Which side do they cheer for? It's an interesting test. Are you still harking back to where you came from or where you are?
”
Conservative UK Politician Norman Tebbit (1990)
Is it important for immigrants to identify with the nation of their residence?
DIY Summary
Is the nation-state still relevant in the 21st century?
Take-away points
Our point of identification and attachment are often very local – for many, the nation is a core source of identity
Nations and the nation-state in particular have come under threat from cultural, economic and political culture forces
This has led to a rise in localist politics
Next Week Week 3: THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE? THE(RE)BIRTH OF GLOBAL CAPITALISM
Readings Cohen and Kennedy, Chapter Four. Group Reading Bello, W. (2003) Global capitalism versus global community. Race & Class, 44(4): 63-76. (downloadable from BBL)
Starter Question: Is globalisation more about the spread of money, ‘capital’ and ‘market forces’ than the spread of cultures?