Globalization as global history
Introducing a dialectical analysis
Barry K. GillsHistory teaches us everything, even the future. World history is clearly multicivilizational. The history of capital within world history is therefore also clearly multi-civilizational, not uni-civilizational, or uni-cultural. Is the future of world history, as well as of capital and even of globalization, also not multi-civilizational? I think so. Although capital operating on a world scale through commerce (involving both production and consumption) does have a historical tendency to reduce all economic forms to a unity (i.e. capital), it has never been accompanied by a true cultural uniformity all over the world. It always coexisted with cultural diversity. So how can a concept such as globalization, which seems so ultracontemporary, be related to global history, which rests on a knowledge of the past that is not necessarily relevant to the present and future as (pre)configured by contemporary globalization processes? And why or how can I posit an identity between these two terms, using the connective word "as," as I do in my title: "Globalization as global history"? I will introduce a set of hypotheses to make my reasoning clear.
|1 Globalization is intimately about global history: past, present, and future, and there are no absolute dichotomies between past and present or between present and future. Rather, aspects of continuity unite these three into a single stream of world historical time and history. |
|2 By using a critical historical method or a historical mode of enquiry, that is, by historicizing globalization, we come to better understand the concept and its complexities and are less mystified by it, in both theory and praxis. |
|3 This critical historical method, when allied to a critical social theory, should focus on understanding both change and continuity in the (world) historical process, itself to be understood not as a strictly linear progression of developmental or evolutionary stages (as in modernization theory), or in a strictly cyclical manner in which there is a simple repetition in a law-like pattern (as in world-system theory), but rather in a dialectical manner, where forms and principles of regulation exist in a high state of historical tension. |
|4 We need a rectification of our common understanding of world or global history, and of globalization, from the current paradigm of embedded Eurocentrism, a construction of knowledge which systematically distorts world/global |
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Book title: Rethinking Global Political Economy: Emerging Issues, Unfolding Odysseys.
Contributors: Mary Ann Tétreault - Editor, Robert A. Denemark - Editor, Kenneth P. Thomas - Editor, Kurt Burch - Editor.
Place of publication: New York.
Publication year: 2003.
Page number: 89.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may
not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.