Globalization and the future of the nation-state: An examination of competing theories of international law.

摘要

The hyper-globalization of capital is making the nation-state increasingly unable to protect the interest of its citizens. This is problematic because the nation-state is where we have traditionally manifested our political will. Thus, the hyper-globalization of capital presents a number of problems that can be addressed by democratically valid international law. In light of the above, the aim of my thesis is to explore the possibility of creating a context of democratically validated international law. I will show that the current vocabulary of international law, a network of trade agreements and alliances, is not a sufficient mechanism for addressing these problems. We require a new, inclusive and deliberative political vocabulary beyond the nation-state.; To that end, I will first show the dangers of hyper-globalized capitalism and how they impact the nation-state. I respond to a possible criticism that claims that the problems posed by globalization are overstated. Next, I will address liberal internationalism, the most commonly offered solution to the problem outlined above. I examine the history and assumptions of international liberal theory. I then demonstrate how liberal theory maintains some tension with democratic theory. Through this exploration, I show that liberal theory is insufficiently representative of the public to form democratic will at the supranational level. I will then proceed to a republican alternative that emphasizes participation because of its commitments to deliberative democracy. However, I reject republicanism because it can be exclusionary to some.; This discussion will allow me to appropriate Habermas' theory that synthesizes the republican and liberal models. His discourse theory overcomes the limitation of both, while at the same time builds on their strengths. On this model, the taming of hyper-globalization of capital is envisioned to be remedied along the lines of the Kantian project of the constitutionalization of international law. Finally, I explore the role that current liberal international institutions can play in creating ad hoc publics and fostering deliberative political communication. From this, we can better understand how we must re-conceptualize the role of international institutions in order to create the new vocabulary of international law needed to address the problems posed by hyper-globalization.