Francis Adams

Globalization and the Dilemmas of the State in the South

Acknowledgements List of Acronyms List of Tables and Figures About the Contributors Globalization and the Developing World: An Introduction F.Adams, S.D. Gupta & K.Mengisteab PART I: THEMATIC ISSUES For a Progressive and Democratic New World Order S.Amin Conceptualizing Resistance to Globalization C.Chin & J.Mittleman The Essence and Appearance of Globalization: The Rise of Finance Capital J.Weeks PART II: CASE STUDIES Popular Resistance to Neoliberalism in Latin America R.Harris Economic Reform and Political Turmoil in Mexico F.Adams Reforming Cuban Socialism: State-Society Dynamics S.Eckstein Globalization and South Africas Transition through a Consociational Arrangement K.Mengisteab Avoiding Globalization: The State and Depoliticization in Nigeria J.Ihonvbere Ideology, Politics, and Public Policy in Ghana: 1982-1996 W.Ofuatey-Kodjoe Liberalization and Retrenchment in the Middle East and North Africa M.Dorraj Global Accumulation and Structural Adjustment in Iran B.Yaghmaian Liberalization, Globalization, and Inequality in South Asia M.Pasha State-Socialist Transition and Labor Relations in China X.Lu Selected Bibliography Index

Globalization and the Developing World: An Introduction

Globalization is the defining characteristic of our time. The modern system of independent nation states and distinct national economies is being replaced by a single transnational political economy. Power and authority are steadily shifting to global institutions and corporations. National governments have seen their sovereignty and control over domestic political and economic affairs rapidly diminish.

The Political Economy of Globalization: An Introduction

Since the dawn of the modern era, nations have carefully guarded their sovereignty and independence. National governments emerged as the primary arbiters of economic and political affairs within clearly delineated territorial boundaries. These governments gradually assumed broad responsibilities for stimulating economic growth, maintaining political stability, and promoting societal welfare.

Financing for development in Latin America and the Caribbean

Since the early 1990s, the nations of Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) have joined other developing countries in an effort to bring the issue of financing for development to the agenda of the United Nations. Although the discussion had begun earlier in the 1980s in the context of the North-South Dialogue, it was not until 1997, when a financial crisis hit many developing countries, that a decision was made to convene an international forum. What is the role and what are the sensitivities and perspectives of LAC in regard to financing for development? Financing for Development in Latin America and the Caribbean attempts to provide a comprehensive answer to this question, taking into account the need to prevent external crisis in the future, to reduce the vulnerability of the reigion, to reform the international finanicial system, and to minimize the social impact of these factors.

Uruguay Round Reforms and the Developing World

The Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade represents a significant advance in multilateral trade negotiations. The Final Accord expands market access, extends foreign investment rights, and liberalizes trade in services. This paper considers the implications of Uruguay Round reforms for developing nations. Although the Accord offers some short-term advantages for these nations, it jeopardizes their long-term prospects for development. Overall, the Accord represents a further step toward the consolidation of economic power in the North and the subordination of national interests to the logic of global markets.

Re-forming the State: The Politics of Privatization in Latin America and Europe

move beyond broad geo-strategic models and take seriously the complex political dynamics within the institutions of Europe. Europe, after all, has reached the point where it is moving forward on a logic and momentum almost of its own. What bothers so many, of course, is that much of this momentum comes not from heads of state and government in the Council, but in the hallways of the Commission where, at present, no one stands for election before a European public.

A Review of “UN Ideas That Changed the World”

Paul Ricoeur (1913–2004) was one of the most impressive and challenging philosophers of the twentieth century, both in the extent of his output and the range of questions he addressed. His work spanning more than five decades linked Continental with AngloAmerican thought while addressing and rethinking many of the major philosophical concerns of his time from phenomenology to hermeneutics to temporality to the nature of the self. His early writings largely on French politics along with his later theoretical discussions of law, justice, and politics are the focus of Bernard Dauenhauer’s informed and illuminating study. The book situates Ricoeur’s political reflections against the background of his major philosophical interest developed in stages from his initial philosophy of the will and evil through his magisterial work on human identity entitled Oneself as Another. Unfortunately, Dauenhauer’s account ends in the mid-1990s before Ricoeur published his final works on Memory, History, Forgetting, the Course of Recognition, and Reflections on the Just. The bibliography, notes, and index, though, are substantial and informative. By providing a thorough sketch of Ricoeur’s philosophical anthropology— initially worked out in the 1950s and constantly reinvigorated by new issues and arguments over the course of forty years—Dauenhauer seeks to clarify the philosophic architecture and conceptual network supporting Ricoeur’s political analyses and formulations. Unfolding the thematic nucleus of that anthropology and showing its relevance to Ricoeur’s political thought is one of the signal achievements of Dauenhauer’s study. In this regard and others, the book is clear, comprehensive, and carefully argued. The central section of the book seeks to explain the “little ethics” (Ricoeur’s term) arising from his analysis of human identity, agency, and action. The ethical aim of life is defined by Ricoeur as “living well with and for others in just institutions.” He then joins this Aristotelian teleological account of ethics to a Kantian deontology of universal moral norms. A dialectical treatment of ethical goods, moral norms, and prudential> decisions allows Ricoeur to propose a political philosophy that is resistant to absolutes, yet motivated by an ethic as substantive as it is pragmatic. The study then turns to several important, and paradoxical, features of political action, including the rhetorical fragility of political language and the special kind of moral imputation that goes with political responsibility. The book concludes with an overall assessment of Ricoeur’s political thought, including his position on the liberal–communitarian debates associated with Rawls, Sandel, and Taylor. Dauenhauer gratefully acknowledges the interviews he had with Ricoeur in preparing the book and gives credit for helpful criticism to one of Ricoeur’s major American translators and interpreters, David Pellauer, whose recent Ricoeur: Guide for the Perplexed would help those unfamiliar with Ricoeur’s thought to better appreciate the sophistication and detail of Dauenhauer’s approach. Bernard P. Dauenhauer is University Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Georgia where he taught from 1972 to 1999. He has written extensively on aspects of Ricoeur’s philosophy.

The Democratic Governance Agenda of the Organization of the American States

“The peoples of the Americas have a right to democracy and their governments have an obligation to promote and defend it.” These words open the “Inter-American Democratic Charter” which was recently drafted by the Organization of American States (OAS). The charter goes on to specify procedures to follow should the constitutional system of any member state be threatened or interrupted. While the OAS champions the Democratic Charter as an important step in the hemispheric defense of democracy, people throughout Latin America have good reason for skepticism. Despite the transition from authoritarian rule, politics remains an exclusive club, with power concentrated in the hands of a narrow elite who benefit from the existing order and resist change.

Re-forming the State: The Politics of Privatization in Latin America and Europe. By Hector E. Schamis. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002. Pp. xi, 204.

move beyond broad geo-strategic models and take seriously the complex political dynamics within the institutions of Europe. Europe, after all, has reached the point where it is moving forward on a logic and momentum almost of its own. What bothers so many, of course, is that much of this momentum comes not from heads of state and government in the Council, but in the hallways of the Commission where, at present, no one stands for election before a European public.

55.00 cloth,

Although Latin America’s transition from military to civilian regimes significantly advanced the region’s political history, and while governing institutions are more open and representative today than in the immediate past, obvious limits to this transition remain. Most countries fall well short of the democratic ideal. The contemporary challenge is to build upon the existing progress to establish more genuinely inclusive and participatory political systems. In previous eras, the process of political reform was considered largely an internal matter to be contested by local forces. Today, domestic and international affairs are not nearly as distinct, and transnational actors significantly shape the political character of these nations. The central institutions and prevailing practices of domestic governance are increasingly subject to the influence and even the approval of international institutions. In Latin American nations, the United Nations (UN), World Bank, InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB), and Organization of American States (OAS) have become directly involved in observing elections, strengthening legislatures, fortifying judiciaries, and enhancing public sector transparency. International efforts toward Latin American political reform reflect an emerging world order in which absolute authority no longer resides exclusively with the state, and national sovereignty is gradually giving way to global governance. Below, we’ll highlight the political reform efforts these four international institutions have sponsored in Latin America. Other global institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization (WTO), and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also reflect the emerging era of global governance. But they are less directly engaged in promoting political reform and are not examined herein. Political reform initiatives constitute my central focus, and not the overall character of these institutions or their broader impact on democratic governance. As numerous scholars have documented, and as the movement for global economic justice has repeatedly emphasized, these institutions are often highly undemocratic in their own decision-making practices and operating principles. Moreover, as more authoritative decisions are made at the supranational level, the prospects for extending and fortifying grassroots democracy and popular empowerment decline.