- from the Mahabharata

DURING THE heady 1960s, the famous media pundit Marshall McLuhan spotted ``the global village'' on the horizon. It was a destination to be reached. Many welcomed ``the reality in the making'', while a few dreaded the prospect. Since then there has been a phenomenal change in the world. Inter-national interdependence has grown to such an extent that the new scenario is discussed in terms of interpenetration and integration. At the same time, a plethora of sub-national and narrower identities (ethnic, linguistic, religious and tribal) have come alive with rekindled vigour and passion. I call this dual transformation - supranational integration and subnational disintegration - ``glocalisation.'' The more widely known phenomenon called ``globalisation'' refers to the first part of this double-headed restructuring of the global architecture of power. Our main concern here is with the crucial need to evolve truly universal values and norms so that we can ``govern'' the globalising world of ours.

The contemporary transformation sweeping the globe since the end of the cold war can be seen as the continuation of the long, uneven and uncertain transition of the world from International Politics to Global Politics. This process of globalisation has gained momentum, breadth and depth on an unprecedented scale since mid-1980s and is rushing in on us even before we are ready mentally and emotionally, let alone institutionally. This secular trend should be distinguished from the current phase of globalisation of markets and marketisation of economics (politics and culture) spearheaded by global capitalism (especially under the U.S. leadership). This process of imposing the values and norms of the West on the rest of the mankind is the essence of Western hegemony. Many a thinking individual (including many in the West) are vehemently opposed to the underlying crass commercialism and consumerism. Some of the more harsh critics dub such degradation as Americanisation of the world. A few go to the extent of condemning the process as Cococolonisation or McDonaldisation of culture!

Confluence of cultures

A new philosophy of globalism is needed to give coherence and direction, to legitimise and sustain globalisation. Without the civilising restraint of truly ``universal'' norms of right and wrong to guide and redeem it, the current wave of globalisation will inevitably degenerate into hegemonisation. There is an urgent need for sustained cross cultural discourse on the philosophical sinews of legitimate global governance. Otherwise, planet earth could be consumed in a ``clash of civilisations'' a la Huntington. Thinking minds the world over should embark on a concerted search for a ``confluence of cultures,'' conceptualise a ``global mosaic'' beyond the ``sovereign state'' and envision an institutional framework for global self-governance. The interchange of ideas is yet to begin. This indeed is a challenge worthy of the best minds on earth.

A paradigmatic shift is taking place in the international system. A new web of identities and loyalties (parallel and hierarchical) is in the making especially in multinational states (like India and Canada) and aspiring multinational states like the European Union. In course of time a new architecture of jurisdictions structuring power and legitimate authority in tune with the altered web of loyalties (and identities) will have to emerge. This will happen sooner than we tend to think or imagine possible. Whether such a new fabric/framework of loyalties and jurisdictions at all levels of governance (local, provincial, national, regional and global) will be arrived at peacefully (or not) is the fundamental challenge of our times. It is important that we build on this emerging global web of governance and mould it in tune with the extent and pace of globalisation under way in commerce, communications, culture and other areas of our lives. If the disjunction between the emerging loyalties and jurisdictions strays beyond the retractable range of elasticity of the extant institutions of governance at the national and international level, utter chaos, lawlessness and violence will become the order of the day the world over.

Shared feeling

In this context it is pertinent to point out that today's mighty and ``solid'' nations were forged in the crucible of humiliations people suffered in common and/or victories they celebrated together. The shared feeling of ``we'' among a people has a chemistry of its own. It unites them against the other, the ``they''. Time and context can and do undermine the solidarity of a people. They may and do reunite in different configurations and sometimes they invoke long dormant national identities (e.g. East Pakistan in 1947 emerged as Bangladesh in 1971).

It is worthwhile reminding ourselves that there were no nation states 500 years ago. Mankind will continue to govern itself even if the nation states disappear from the scene in the near or not so near future. Enough wars have been fought and enough people have been killed and maimed in its name. I always wonder whether an armed attack from outer space (Mars or Moon) would bring all of ``us'' the earthlings together against ``them''!

The most crucial change needed is in our attitude towards change. Man's greatest challenge does not lie in coming up with new ideas. It often lies in escaping from the old ones. The scientific-rational-western-liberal-capitalist-male-mindset of insistence on individual rights and entitlements against society without giving equal importance to the corresponding and organically linked fundamental obligations and duties is the very basis of the ills afflicting the modern society. The self-centred and essentially selfish (bordering on the greedy) atomistic conceptions of society with the basically flawed notion that we can and should get what all we want (whether we need it or not) from society/nation without contributing to its betterment is the overarching flaw (nay, the foundational evil).

The whole rational choice heritage of scientism/modernity/progress as practised and championed by the West has achieved a great deal during the last four centuries. However, this legacy has now reached its ``logical'' limits of utility and relevance. ``Progress'' itself is being questioned and is becoming questionable as a desired goal. It is time to curb the excesses of logic/rationality and return to sanity and common sense. An ancient Sanskrit axiom enjoins humanity to shun too much, Athi Sarvatra Varjayet (excess should be eschewed everywhere), in everything and at all times!

Western legacy

In international relations, the Western legacy of the last four/five centuries has mainly emphasised conflict and clash of interests and justified the sovereign nation state's right (not merely its power) to pursue its ``national interests'' as it sees for itself at the expense of the common good of mankind as a whole. The logic and mindset behind such policies will inevitably lead to endless aggrandisement by nation states and clash of civilisations, which could sound the death-knell to ``the global village'' and lead to the end of the world as we know it. Instead, nations and multinational states should seek a confluence of cultures envisaging an enhancement of the lives of people everywhere. We must learn from the Hindu, Buddhist, Confucian, Sumerian, Incan and other ancient civilisations and their visions of the cosmos and man's place in it. We can then rescue planet earth from the current trajectory of ``progress'' towards exhaustion and annihilation!

A return to Gandhi, Green, God and Green Peace (Mahatma Gandhi, Thomas Hill Green, faith in the Supreme Being and ecological balance of the planet earth) and above all common sense is the need of the hour. We must advance (or return) to conceptions of authority as trust, i.e., power with a redeeming moral and social purpose. In short we must return to idealism. Rampant consumerism of here and now, i.e., ``presentism'' afflicting the modern age must be replaced by a healthy balance between the present and the past, and also between the present and the future. Narrow particularisms of whites, blacks, browns and yellows: North vs. South; rich vs. poor; majorities vs. minorities; crusades for gender equality and children's rights, etc., are significant and deserve their place in society. But, even at their best they offer only a constricted and partial vision of what the mankind and the planet require. Moderation has to become the hallmark of the human civilisation in the new millennium. Need, not greed, should be the basis of all human endeavour on earth! Mother earth has enough to meet everyone's need, but not his greed, as Mahatma Gandhi observed wisely.

We the earthlings have to learn to live in harmony with nature, in peace with ourselves and at peace with fellowmen, other nations and all the living and non-living inhabitants of our only home, the earth. Humans have no earthly choice!

B. RAMESH BABU

UGC Emeritus Fellow,

University of Hyderabad.