This week’s class was filled with state to state relations, the role of the non-state actors, and plumbing. This all started with the question, “What is considered world politics?” And that remains the question. What should be under the wide umbrella of world politics? I look back to Thursday class when we spent a little over an hour and a half talking about if plumbing was considered part of world politics and I have to agree with the idea that plumbing is part of world politics. But I agree with certain reservations. If the plumbing breaks down in a small town in Suburbia, USA then the people will not vote in a radical politician who will try to destroy Canada or Mexico. But in Palestine when the not working plumbing is another woe in a long list, then the election of a radical organization into power is more likely. But this principle of voting into power a person who will deliver the needs of the people isn’t uncommon. It happens in the US, but it isn’t considered world politics. World politics usually requires an interaction between 2 people, a person and a group, or 2 groups from different nation-states. But that only covers a part of world politics. Like PTJ said, “What the question should be is what isn’t world politics?”
The exhibits on DC baseball and the riots were really interesting. The riots exhibit gave me a more intensive look into what happened compared to what I learned in history class. It made me think what people have to go through to finally get justice. I look at the situation in the middle east and see a parallel between the race riots of the 1960s and the people of Palestine. The only difference though is that the race riots weren’t world politics. What is considered world politics needs to be looked at one case at a time. We cannot classify all of a type of events into world politics because there is always that possibility that one trade deal isn’t world politics. World politics is too large a subject to cover in just one entry so hopefully I find some answers this semester.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
How can we study something if we don't even know what it is? Before chemists can describe the physical properties of an atom, they need to agree on what an atom is, and the same holds true in any natural or social science. Before we can create theories that describe how "world politics" work, we need to define world politics; If that cannot be done, then "world politics" isn't a valid subject of scholarly inquiry.
As a working definition of world politics, I would propose the following: World politics is the study of the interactions between independent institutions of power that are not contained within the same legal framework.
Thus, the interactions between Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, and Fatah over the provision of plumbing to Palestine constitute world politics, because all four organizations possess independent power and are not contained within the same legal structure. Plumbing in Overland Park, Kansas, probably isn't world politics, because it deals with the actors involved in it (the state, the municipality, the contractor) are all within the framework of US law. But if Overland Park finds lead in the plumbing, and sues the Mexican corporation that manufactures the pipes, it just might be.
Post a Comment