Political globalization

Political globalization refers to the expansion and increasing complexity of the world’s political system. This system includes national governments, their affiliated organizations, and intergovernmental bodies, as well as independent elements of global civil society—such as international non-governmental organizations and social movement groups. A central feature of this process is the diminishing role of the nation-state and the growing influence of other political actors. The establishment and ongoing operation of the United Nations is often cited as a classic example of political globalization. Alongside economic globalization and cultural globalization, it is considered one of the three main dimensions of globalization in academic study.

Several scholars have offered definitions. William R. Thompson describes it as the growth of a global political system and its institutions that manage inter-regional transactions, including but not limited to trade. Valentine M. Moghadam sees it as a trend toward multilateralism—with the United Nations playing a key role—alongside the emergence of a transnational state apparatus and the rise of national and international NGOs that monitor governments and have expanded their influence. Manfred B. Steger defines it as the intensification and spread of political connections across the globe. Colin Crouch offers a longer definition, noting that political globalization refers both to the increasing power of global governance bodies like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization, and to the spread of international NGOs, social movements, and transnational advocacy networks that form a kind of global civil society. Gerard Delanty and Chris Rumford frame it as a tension among three interacting processes: global geopolitics, global normative culture, and polycentric networks. The book *World Federalist Manifesto, Guide to Political Globalization* defines it as the creation of a global governance system that regulates relations between nations and guarantees rights arising from social and economic globalization.

To study political globalization, scholars use various sources. Salvatore Babones points to the *Europa World Year Book* for data on diplomatic ties, the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ *The Military Balance* for military matters, and the U.S. government’s *Patterns of Global Terrorism* for terrorism-related data. Political globalization is measured by aggregating and weighting information on the number of embassies and high commissioners in a country, its memberships in international organizations, its participation in UN peacekeeping missions, and the number of international treaties it has signed. This method, used by researchers such as Axel Dreher, Noel Gaston, Pim Martens, and Jeffrey Haynes, is available from the KOF Institute at ETH Zurich.

Like globalization itself, political globalization has multiple dimensions and interpretations. It has been discussed both as offering new emancipatory possibilities and as leading to a loss of autonomy and fragmentation of the social world. It can be seen in trends such as global democratization, the growth of global civil society, and a move beyond the centrality of the nation-state as the sole political actor. Key questions in this discussion include whether the nation-state’s importance is declining, what causes such changes, and how the concept of global governance emerges. The United Nations is a classic example, as are political actions by NGOs and social movements focused on issues like environmental protection. David Held has suggested that ongoing political globalization might lead to a form of cosmopolitan democracy resembling a world government, though this idea has been criticized as overly idealistic.

The relationship between political globalization and the nation-state is hotly debated. The central question is whether political globalization signals the decline of the nation-state, particularly regarding sovereignty and political cultures. Hyper-globalists argue that globalization has so thoroughly reshaped the world that state boundaries are losing significance. Skeptics, however, dismiss this as naive, maintaining that the nation-state remains the supreme actor in international relations.

Cyclical theories of globalization have been proposed by George Modelski. He defines global order as a management network centered on a lead unit and its contenders for leadership, pursuing collective action at the global level. This system is allegedly cyclical, with each cycle lasting about 100 years and a new hegemonic power emerging each time: Portugal (1492–1580, during the Age of Discovery); the Netherlands (1580–1689, beginning with the Eighty Years’ War); the United Kingdom (first cycle, 1688–1792, starting with the wars of Louis XVI; second cycle, 1792–2000, starting with the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars); and the United States (1914 to a predicted 2030, starting with World War I and World War II). Each cycle has four phases, beginning with global war.