So far, we've discussed many instances (or lack thereof) of international societies. Can you give instances from the past and the present of where we can find international societies? Can you predict the formation of any international society in the future? Blog away!
28 comments:
In the near future I expect an "International Society" consisting of various Sunni Muslim countries in which they will dispose of the Western supported dictators in replace for a government that instills Islamic Law. There are several reasons why I anticipate this. First off, in much of the Arab World, many young muslim men and women are becoming more conservative than their parents generation was. (Oddly enough, the opposite has happened with Kurds and Persians) Iraq for example, was considered a secular country in the 1950's but its democratically elected leadership now is currently very conservative.
In addition to this, it is in their direct interest to form one large Islamic government rather than several small Middle East nations. In fact, just looking at the modern middle East map, one is forced to conclude that the countries were made the way they were made because the British and French were terrified at the prospect of a united Middle East that int he past had almost brought down Vienna. The creation of Lebanon blocks Syria's access to the sea, Israel/Palestine blocks Jordan's access to the sea (although Jordan and Israel were originally going to be combined into one Jewish state) and Kuwait blocks much of Iraq's access to the Persian Gulf. Its also particularly odd that Qatar and the UAE are independent nations rather than part of a larger state such as Saudi Arabia. The same goes for oil rich Bahrain and Iran even though Iran has historical ties to Bahrain. (Mohammad Reza Shah wished to unite Bahrain but the people of Bahrain were not interested and he respected their wishes. I assume at this point there are tons of US bases there to stop the new Iranian government from controlling the region?) Not to mention, Iraq as a country is made up of three groups that hate one another. A united Middle Eastern government would do away with these boundaries that separate them and more importantly allow for equal sharing of oil. The decreasing Christian populations throughout the Middle East (Palestine was 10-20% Christian in 1948- now its around 1.5%) would mean that everyone would be the same race and religion.
I haven't touched on the number one reason why I anticipate this to happen yet which is the belief in a "greater Israel" spanning from the Nile to the Euphrates. This seems unlikely given the fact that Israel gave up Sinai in 1979 and Rabin? almost give up Golan in the mid 90's. This idea is absurd simply on the grounds that there are not enough Jews to fill up such a great deal of land! By any means, if you believe that your land is threatened you will be very zealous in protecting it. Rumors run wild in the Middle East and we can expect the same for this one as the one about how Israel "infected" melons sent to Saudi Arabia with AIDS. The various dictatorships will likely fall and the new governments will be determined to "defend" their land from "Zionist Expansionism"
--Dan Greenbaum
Additionally, might I add the "greater Israel" theory is not limited just to individuals with poor education. I recall reading an article by a man who was clearly well educated about how John Hagee is pushing for Greater Israel and that he has such power that we need to be concerned about him.
--Dan Greenbaum
In response to the above comments on the uprising of the Sunni Muslim countries, Dan forgets to mention that the Sunni are the largest denomination of the Muslim faith. This fact alone contributes to some of the points that he makes, especially when he refers to "their direct interest to form one large Islamic government." That point (shared understanding) is also a key structural idea behind the characteristics of international societies. I also just wanted to thank Dan for the extremely intuitive look into maps, I had to look at one after I read his post I was so intrigued.
I also looked into the "Greater Israel" theory that Dan brings up, and found that "Greater Israel" is a bibilical development. Many devout Jews and Catholics find that God gave Abraham "this land, from the river of Egypt as far as the great river the Euphrates. The land of the Kenites, Kenizites, Kadmonites; the Hittites, Perizites, Refaim; the Amorites, Canaanites, Gigashites and Yevusites." - Genesis 15:18-21
So, initially, this was not a theory, but a belief, and one of the ideas that constitutes an international society is that of shared beliefs.
Anyways...I think that clearly defining an international society is difficult because complete agreement is rare to locate in culture, knowledge, beliefs, etc. I would venture a guess that any pre-modern world system (Europe, China, Russia) had a chance of being categorized as an international society at some point. There far fewer developments to consider before the modern world expanded. As we learned in class there can be systems with no society, but there cannot be society without systems.
- Megan Pettingill
In response to the original post, I find both the idea of a pan-Islamic state as well as the concept of a "Greater Israel" to be patently absurd. Judging simply from the amount of sectarian strife currently engulfing Iraq, I find it extremely difficult to believe that Sunni Muslims would ever unite under a single ruler without a bloody, fractious civil war with their Shiite brethren.
I take exception to Megan's statement about Catholic belief in any "promise of land to the Hebrews". Support for this belief in the Christian community is primarily concentrated among fundamentalist, born-again Protestant Christians in the United States. As any expansion of Israel beyond its current borders would likely require the extermination of native populations to guarantee safe land for Israeli Jews, I highly doubt that the world would stand for a sort of Israeli war for modern-day lebensraum.
As for the original topic, however, I find that the European Union is a model development for the trend in international societies. Larger coalitions seem to be on the rise, while Balkanization seems to be the opposite. And with Putin in control in Russia, it will be very interesting to see how this seeming trend towards unification of distinct nationalities will progress in the CIS.
The above post was made by:
Luke Kaczmarek
Well, I know that the thought has been made vocal, but there are different variations. We have terrorist societies, at present, all over the world. I think as time goes on, these societies will grow culturally. I think this will create terrorist societies that will have common goals that will be more tuned towards specific types of terrorism. An example would be a group dedicated to computer viruses, assassination, etc. We see this in our military; so why not it's enemies.
On the other hand, I can see, again, as time goes on, societies being created outside the gov who fight terrorism in their regions. Kind of like gangs who try to scare away groups like the Mujahadin or Al Qaeda.
Stephane Stewart
Personally, I highly doubt that in the future there will be a more definitive international society. Because of the major differences in various parts of the world, even with homogenization and globalization, and how much I wish that the world would become more tolerant, I can't help but be pessimistic about the possibilities. Yes, we still have the institutions such as war, trade, human rights, etc, with those basic rules about them... but I feel that the disagreement among countries about the definition of these things and proper conduct in them won't resolve itself anytime soon, if at all.
Right now the world generally has one large international society, but I can see the possibility of this breaking down in the future. Sadly, if the US continues in its current path, it will either inspire new international societies that are based on their opposition to us (i.e. Middle Eastern countries), or will be excluded from a future society due to alienation of other countries or our economic decline. Eventually, if we don't find better solutions to international relations problems there's a chance that national differences will become more important than globalization. At that point, I can see smaller international societies forming, based on political beliefs or economic strength, and possibly causing the world to regress to its early isolationist tendencies.
--Katie Head
In Saharan Africa, one could argue that a nomadic international society exists. Those who are nomadic generally do not recognize the country borders and in this case, go where the food source is bountiful and the conditions are sustainable. They have the same beliefs to maintain existence and live off of the land.
This region in Africa is largely forgotten because it is a minor player in world politics, despite the different cases of humanitarian efforts, in which there are differing opinions in regards to treatment of gender, sexual conquests, and limiting the spread of disease.
Michael Molaski
I think it is very hard to predict the formation of any international society in the future. For one, the world is becoming less and less tolerant when it comes to religion and regime. The conflicting views of Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Hindus, and Democracies, Communists, Islamic Law, and many many others makes it almost impossible for any consitency in international society. Competition for power in today's world is at an all-time high. Every religion or regime believes that they are the one true existing philosophy. Although some religions and some regimes remain the most powerful, the formation of a new international society, without extreme conflict, seems impossible.
Kevin Moreno
I don't know if the world is becoming less tolerant of other religions and regimes (at least not compared to 100 years ago), but I would say we have become increasingly anxious about all these differences between the people in the world today. Sometimes I think it would be so much easier if we had a world government system in which all nations are absolutely required to follow sanctions and laws. This would make the issue of anarchy moot, and we would be able to deal with problems of sovereignty much differently. However, I know this is a very improbable future. There are too many differences that exist from culture to culture to even remotely allow for one world government. Thus, I believe, the UN will be all we have to rely on in the future in this sense. I do not believe, however, the world will be able to stay the way it is without maintaining American dominance. The US has lost a lot of support in recent years, but even so it holds such a vast amount of power basically because of it's incredible economic status. This is another issue of the "what will happen with china?" idea. Will China ever be the dominating force over the International Society that is mainly dominated by the US today? I don't think so, but also, I think that if it ever happens, the world will change very seriously.
-Meg Gallagher
One of the key factors that determine and exemplify international society today is the issues that we agree upon. A very prominent issue that not only shows international society but will probably shape the future of this concept is things like genocide. The problem with the Armenian resolution is a great example of international society and what direction it is heading. We have talked about in class most countries share the norm that genocide is wrong. However, the international community is doing little to do anything about this issue. The result of this conflict will likely shape how the coming international society interacts with one another as well as what ideas and norms they share. The same can also be said about things like terrorism and the morals we hold as a global society on this issue. We are starting to see a separate sort of international society in places like the Middle East also compared to the Western civilizations. All of these different factors define as well as shape international society as a key concept of the world we live in.
--Mike Poznansky
I think I agree with Luke that a pan-Islamic will likely never happen. Sure, that's what many radicals want: a theocratic society controlled by Islamic law. That's what a lot of the terrorists say they are fighting for.
However, I don't think the Islamic countries are capable of forming such an alliance. As Luke pointed out, just look at the sectarian chaos in Iraq. The current leadership of most Middle Eastern countries is so corrupt and inept that a strong alliance would never work. The only way a pan-Islamic state could be created would be for one country to actually invade and conquer the other countries, but even that is unlikely because the West would never allow it.
Josh Shannon
Following the polarization theory of globalization, I think we will never see the creation of a single international society. I believe while we hope for a sort of hybridization of cultures, many of them are to rigid and defined along traditional ideas that it will be incredibly difficult to integrate them completely into an international society. Muslim fundamentalist will always find reason to berate the West. And the West will only be in fear of those extremist who threaten our way of life.
In the past, I believe that international society was near impossible as distances and communication had yet to be developed to the point we have seen for the past century. International societies existed mainly in the form of religion, as a lasting institution it had the capacity and standing to reach distance lands.
-Tanner Herpst
I am part of the belief that it is nearly impossible to really ever have a single unified international society. There are just too many differences between cultures and societies to ever have something so unified as an IS. However, over the course of time, (if we don't blow ourselves up first) the spread of globalization can and most likely will help bring us closer to an IS. In today's current world, however, it seems like we're almost getting farther away from creating that society, with more and more disagreements between nations on so many various topics. It's tough to really predict what will happen, especially with so many nations being so close to the edge of taking action against others right now, or having already taken action. It's really impossible to predict what could happen with an IS when you have terrorist attacks and other such strife going on around the globe every day. As for what happens whenever those issues around the globe have all ended, I can only say I hope that there would be something like a unified IS, but the only way to know is to wait and see, in my opinion.
The size and scale of globalization, I predict, will continue to breed societies that are far more reaching than just beyond border. There may be societies that are bred on the internet through blogs just like this one. No one can be sure if there will be a new society developed in the future, but if past history is any measuring stick, than a new society will certainly develop at some point in the future. While there are arguably numerous international societies that exist today, the development of groups such as al-Qaeda show that geographical boundaries no longer can limit the spread of a society.
-Ryan Pierce
I think that international societies are becoming more and more likely. Over time with globilization we are seeing more similarities within one another. It is enivitable due to the amount of interaction the entire world has with each other. Yes there are still many differneces but its like comparing a friendship, many people can be in a group of friends and have so much in common but there will still be things they will disagree. That doesnt prevent them from completely getting along with each other.
Jessica Stecker
In today's world, I think that global societies are going to become more and more prominent. The main reason behind this is globalization. I am someone who believes in globalization and the good it can do. Although it seems that the United States is using globalization to make everyone "just like us" I do not think that is the whole case. The whole world is spreading its view and ideas so that we can all benefit from each other. With this happening there will be more of a global society created. I think with a stronger global society it will be less likely for wars to happen and it would also benefit all the countries involved economies. In my opion a stronger global society being created would be beneficial to all parties involved, not just the "strong" powers such as the US and Japan.
-Kimberly Renner
The evolution of technology will be the killer of International Societies. It seems there is an increasing number of opinions. With the advent of technology, it is easier for the propaganda and ideals to spread. War and conflict is also much easier to start in areas where there has always been turmoil. However, this relates mostly to the Middle East. It doesn't seem as if many other parts of the world are in fights, in which both sides are almost equal in terms of power and determination.
-Kristian Quiroz-
I believe that it is very hard to predict if a new international society will actually form or not. While there may be a drive to pursue the creation of one, there are many problems that may lie beneath it, such as general conflict and disagreement, war, or other political reasons. As some other students have already stated, a unified Islamic society in the middle east is near impossible. Even if it were possible, it would be a very long time filled with war and death before anything in the slightest would happen. People don't just unite like that and form a society. In order for a new international society to form, a very significant amount of people must agree with each other in some form or another. If the following is strong enough to suppress it's opposition and maintain itself, then the international society will survive.
-Chun (Ben) Choi
I feel that we see international societies a lot more than we think we do. Either that or we just do not define international societies correctly. International Societies can range from everything from soccer organizations such as CONCACAF and the FIFA world cup to more complex, serious things like the UN and and international organizations. I feel that international organizations are, themselves, international societies. I feel that for the most part, people over-analyze the term "international society".
Corey Wall
In terms of future international societies, i would not be surprised to see a society for example called The United Nations of Islam, or something like that. Why? WEll for years and years, there have been wars fought between rival Islamic tribes preventing countries or people from reaching their full potential. More and more Arab countries are starting to dissagree with the rest of the world and the US in extreme particular. There are many interests in the Middle East that are profited from by western civilization, etc. What would be a huge head spinner and blow to the US? If the middle eastern rival tribes united for a bigger common goal which would be to bring down the US. If they all United and kicked out all US from being able to profit off anything form the Mid East, they would then hold leverage, or some clout, bargaining chips, etc. I meen, why is that concept so hard to put together? Islam tribes all being united. Every tribe dividing up and bitching over dumb stuff reminds me of the high school cafeteria. Can it really be that hard for them to act a little more mature and unite?
-Ryan Harrison
As far as the past is concerned you can use the League of Nations as an example of an international society. Simply because they all had a common goal which was to keep World War II from happening even though it faid, it showed a univerisal unity for a common cause. Currently the UN has to be considered a international society because to me their gathered for one real puspose, and thats to prevent WW III at all cost. Yes they deal with many other issues but the main one being WAR. For future international societys I could see Africa finally becoming United and becoming a major world power.
There are many types of international societies ; religion-driven society, economy-driven society and idelogy-driven society.
The religion-driven society is the Muslim society, economy-driven society is EU. The last one is said to be the ideology-driven society such as the USSR.
From the past, many instances related to the religion existed and still become active. As Dan mentioned, Muslim and other similar groups consist of typical international organization with different culture in terms of the age and generation. One other thing that we can think of is the USSR, which used to be a big conglomerated of the communist society. Although perestroika and glasnost advocated by Gorbachov dispersed the USSR, these countries vis a vis EU and the US will be gathered together with stronger connection, gradually being another type of international unity. Because these countries are more strongly intertwined in terms of economy, politics and ideology, they will predictably try to reunite as to their basic needs to survive in this harsh global society.
-Kim, Hyo Suk-
International societies are kind of a broad topic since they have a huge range, going from sports organizations, like soccer, to trade, like WTO and OPEC, to religious orders, like the Islam world when united under a caliphate. However, there are many failed attempts at creating international societies, such as the medieval Christian crusades and the Nazi party in World War II. Even the USSR could be considered and international organization by today's standards. They range all over the place and are neverending.
Mack Shane
It’s virtually impossible to predict what the future has in store for international society, as history has shown us time and time again, one war is all it takes to bring a great power to an occupied country or vice versa. It is however, reasonable to say that as long as the US holds the cards it’s currently holding, it’ll be in a good position. Right now we basically control the WTO and have huge influence in the UN. On the other hand, with all the changes going on in the east, most importantly with Iraq becoming a more conservative democracy.
-John Georges
With the increasing spread of globalization I believe that in the future there will be a stronger international society. The larger powers will spread even further throughout the world. Already there are U.S. companies all throughout Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. I believe that even though other countries may resist this, it inevitably will hapeen. Though I don't believe that the creation of an international society in this way will be beneficial to the smaller countries.
-Amanda McDonnell
International societies exist today and can develope in the future. An example is the world becoming smaller because of the digital age and the internet there are new methods and rules that nation-states can interact. Factors such as cultural differences and manners will be tested in this new form and communicating and informing until there is a shared understanding in many areas such as business, media, as well as terrorism.
International societies that exist in the present as well as those that are developing will always have people who pull away and disagree, many resulting in violence, as recent as the 9/11 attacks showed this as well as in the past with Hitler and Germany as well as the bloody French Revolution.
There is yet to be an international society where everyone agrees, period. The past seems to be a cycle instead of an experience one should learn from. Because people will always want a sense of individualism in the global society. An example is why communism may look good on paper but doesn't work in the society.
-Michelle Rana
Post a Comment