Volume 2, Issue 1, March 2019, Page: 1-10
On the Globalization and Fragmentation of the Modern World
Kamaludin Gadzhiev, The National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia
Received: Oct. 16, 2018;       Accepted: Feb. 13, 2019;       Published: Mar. 5, 2019
DOI: 10.11648/j.jpsir.20190201.11      View  802      Downloads  235
In the article an attempt is made to reveal and analyze some key, in the author's opinion, factors underlying the controversial nature of globalization. Having considered some of the most significant consequences of globalization from the point of view of the unity of the modern world, the main attention is focused on the main factors, nature, systemic and structural components of those tendencies and processes that resulted in the opposite tendency to undermine this unity. The author sees the paradox of globalization in the fact that, due to a complex of factors determining the geopolitical picture of the modern world, it has created the conditions for localization, re-nationalization, fragmentation and deconstruction of the modern world. The trend of de-sovereignization of national states is replaced by the trend of their re-sovereignization. The most significant examples in support of this thesis are the processes of disintegration of multinational states and the formation of many new national states, the growing influence of nationalist and separatist movements, organizations, parties that oppose globalism, universalism and transnationalism. One of their manifestations became the phenomenon of building various fences and walls separating peoples, countries and states from each other. On the basis of these and a whole complex of related factors, trends and processes, it was concluded that in the modern world, a single humanity with a complex of values, ideals, and interests common to all nations and states can be imagined, figuratively speaking, from a bird's flight. In reality, the unity of humankind is an abstract, metaphorical concept, which is intended to unite very heterogeneous, contradictory, conflicting, cultural and civilizational circles, peoples, states, communities pursuing different, sometimes opposite goals and interests as a whole. Of course, they have a complex of common fundamental interests, from the protection of which depends the very physical existence of the mankind. The combination of these two seemingly opposing principles forms the basis of the formula “fragmentation in unity, or unity in fragmentation”.
Globalization, Fragmentation, Humanity, Unity, Sovereignty, World Order
To cite this article
Kamaludin Gadzhiev, On the Globalization and Fragmentation of the Modern World, Journal of Political Science and International Relations. Vol. 2, No. 1, 2019, pp. 1-10. doi: 10.11648/j.jpsir.20190201.11
Copyright © 2019 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Bauman, Z. 1997. Glocalization or to whom globalization, and to whom the location (In Polish language) // Sociological studies, 1997, №3:54-68.
Berlin, I. 1996. Four Essays on Liberty. London and New York: Oxford University Press.
Cerny, Ph. G. and Prichard, A. 2017. The new anarchy: Globalization and fragmentation in world politics. First Published June 20, 2017. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1177/1755088217713765
Council of Europe: there is no longer a single force that can decide for everyone (In Russian). November 29, 2014. Available: http: //news.mail.ru/politics/20302899.
Danilevsky, N. L. 1989. Russia and Europe. Moscow: Kniga.
Democracy in Japan: Experience and Lessons (In Russian). 1991. Moscow: Nauka.
Fallaci, O. 1989. Anger and pride (In Italian) // Corriere della sera, Sepeber 26, 1979.
Gonzalez, P. 2017. The walls of Europe (In Spanish) // La Vanguardia, March 7, 2017.
Ishida, Т. 1983. Japanese Political Culture: Change and Continuity
Jaspers, K. 1991. The Meaning and Assignment of History (In Russian). Moscow: Political Literature Publisher.
Lebon, G. 1898. Psychology of Nations (In Russian). Moscow: Publishing House "Sytin Partnership"
Levenson, J. R. 1958. Confucian China and Its Modern Fate: The Problem of Intellectual Continuity. Berkeley: University of California Press. New Brunswick, N. J.: Transaction Books.
Masakazu, Y. 1986. Pluralism in der Kultur. Japan in der Westen. Frankfurt-a.-M.: Campus Verlag
Rachman, G. 2017. Angela Merkel`s blunder. Donald Tramp and the end of the West // Financial Times. May 29.
Rosenau, J. N. 2003. Globalization and Governance: Bleak Prospects for Sustainability // Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, №3.
Toynbee, A. 1995. Civilization on Trial (In Russian). Moscow: Iris press.
Trubetskoy, N. S. 1920. Europe and humanity (In Russian). Sofia: Russian-Bulgarian publishing house.
Browse journals by subject