1. Global Tensions, Global Possibilities: Everyday Forces of Conformity and Contestation
- Author:
- Jean Michel Montsion, Samah Sabra, James Gaede, Jeremy D. Kowalski, Rhiannon Mosher, Teresa Kramarz, Kathryn Mossman, Adam Sneyd, Luis Alfredo Marroquin-Campos, Rob Downie, Heather Battles, Adrienne Smith, Ahmed T. Rashid, Joanne Nowak, Liam Riley, David Haldane Lee, Greg Shupak, Arun Nedra Rodrigo, Lauren Scannell, Naomi Achus, and Ethel Tungohan
- Publication Date:
- 07-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute on Globalization and the Human Condition, McMaster University
- Abstract:
- Academics theorizing and analyzing the impacts of globalization on everyday life are conventionally divided between those who highlight the (overt or hidden) opportunities and advantages afforded by globalizing processes and others who emphasize their negative impacts on populations across the world. The former tend to focus on such things as increased access to paid labour, faster modes of communication, and technological ease of transportation (of people and information) across global networks. The latter, in contrast, generally stress the vicious implications of globalization's systemic processes, which continue to exacerbate polarization between rich and poor and, invariably, mean uneven access to labour, communication, and transportation. With this division in mind, the Graduate Student Research Group of the Institute on Globalization and the Human Condition held a conference titled Global tensions, global possibilities in September 2007. The conference organizers intended to bring together graduate students to challenge the above oppositions which often characterize contemporary globalization theories. By gathering an eclectic group of young scholars from various disciplines and backgrounds, the key aim driving Global tensions, global possibilities was to question disciplinary and attitudinal divides in theorizing globalization. A secondary, and related, intention of the organizers was for the conference to be a space in which participants (i.e. presenters, discussants, and audience) would together (re)think the implications of globalizing processes in non-dichotomizing ways that transcend such traditional divides. The organizers recognized that their intentions were not necessarily revolutionary. The works of several prominent scholars in various disciplines have denoted the need to be critical of further polarizing contemporary globalization theory (Comaroff and Comaroff 2001; Mudimbe-Boyi 2002; Ong 2006). For example, in their discussions of globalization, Jean and John Comaroff (2001) have indicated that globalizing processes and their attendant consequences can be neither classified nor understood in simple terms. Like the Comaroffs, the conference organizers felt that one cannot deny the intense messiness of any investigation of globalizing processes. Instead, they wanted to stress that globalization is simultaneously creative and destructive, enabling and constraining, beneficial and detrimental. Given that it has come out of the conference, the same line of reasoning forms the driving force behind this graduate student volume of the Working Paper Series. Below, we discuss our rationale for organizing the volume in the way we have. We begin with a brief discussion of our understanding of the need to move beyond theorizing globalization as either liberating or oppressive. Throughout the following sections, we move back and forth between our theorization of this necessity and the specifics of how the dichotomy beyond which we want to move re-emerged in the context of the conference. In the final section, we provide a brief description of the papers and our motivation for organizing them as we have.
- Topic:
- Gender Issues, Globalization, Health, Human Rights, Human Welfare, International Organization, Markets, Migration, and Science and Technology