Globalization vs Nation State: the retrogradation?

Abstract

In early 21st century, in various parts of Europe and America there have been attempts of backsliding from free movement of people and capitals inherent to globalization era, and restoration of full sovereignty of a nation state. Presenting features of this trend are different: nationalist forces’ coming to power in Eastern Europe, Brexit, election of D. Trump as U. S. President, the populists’ victory in parliamentary elections in Italy. The Populism of diverse colors becomes a driving force of such attempts. The tendency mentioned above is based on a widespread dissatisfaction with the neo-liberal character of globalization coming from domination of international monopolies and oligopolies in this process, which neglect the variety of local conditions and prioritize their own vested interests. The supremacy of the market element gives important advantages to the strongest, the most mobile and faster developing participant of the process, not taking whichever national and social interests in consideration. At the same time, free cross-border displacement of human flows creates conditions for erosion of the European Christian identity, facilitates the appearance of hotbeds of the Islamic terrorism. Within the boundaries of the European Union, a protest against the bureaucratic character of integration processes regulation merges into the discontent with consequences of neo-liberal globalization. The abovementioned crisis trends make us address the experience of the past. The political crises of the contemporary history, which caused wars and revolutions, were often construed as harbingers of an inevitable collapse of the existing development model (suffice it to recall the forecasts of Karl Marx and his followers). However, not the death of capitalism was a result of historical evolution, but its reformation and the emergence of social welfare state. The crisis affiliated to globalization may have similar effect. There are quite a number of proposals aimed at the EU reforming. Efforts to improve or сounteract at least the most vivid flaws of globalization processes are not excluded. This brings up the question about a subject or subjects of such attempts. The populist movement claims an actor’s role. Yet there are doubts that it is able to play this role. At the same time, the civil society now takes on greater and greater importance in the sequence of events. Quite possibly, not only a national civil society could seriously contribute to reforming of globalization processes, but a gradually shaping global civil society using modern communication media as well. The experience tells us also that, first of all, consideration for and harmonization of national interests should become a direction of reforming, which means not only a complicated system of agreements between nation states and their associations, but gradual and far-reaching improvement of global governance institutions. However, the global civil society is hardly homogenious, and given the vast variety, heterogeneity and contradictions of national interests, the task of harmonization appears to be extremely difficult.