The Challenge of Contemporaneity
Editoržs Note: Venezuela Analķtica starts today a series of
monthly articles seeking to answer the following questions : What are the challenges of
modernity?, How do we face them?
The first of this series is The challenge of Contemporaneity and it has to do
with some general ideas about a proposal on the subject. This work also establishes the
parameters to be used as a framework for future issues of this series which will deal with
specific challenges such as world employment and education and their future
trends.
he Twentieth Century was well into
its first decade before people became aware of it. In fact, it is during, and after the First
World War that all new discoveries and development in different fields (particularly
aviation, transportation and scientific discoveries such as antibiotics among others) are
perceived. The next Millenium, on the contrary, seems to be present well ahead of
time.
For more than a decade, we have been observing deep transformations. Perhaps
the engulfing progress in the field of electronics and computer technology weigh quite
heavily when explaining the issue. There is no doubt that the massive use of personal
computers, along with the amazing changes in the realm of communications and
information are a more powerful boost on transformations making them appear much
more like a space/time revolution than a simple process of evolution.
In the field of power and world politics, the fall of the Berlinžs wall has become
a symbol of the end of the Cold War, and, in the opinion of many, it also marks the end
of ideologies. Whatever the meaning of the collapse of socialism and the fall of the
former Soviet Union, the truth is that we are witnessing the end of a bipolar power
system. The twentieth century saw the emergence of two colossal powers: United States
and Soviet Union, the two antagonistic powers configured both axis of a system in which
the opposing forces - democracy and freedom on one side and socialism and state
control of the economy on the other- maintained an unstable balance supported by a
nuclear arsenal. On a parallel course, and during the whole period , Japan makes its
entrance as an actor on the scene, and today is an economic power in itself.
In the field of economy, on the other side, the triumph of a system of economic
freedom can be observed, specially in post-capitalist countries, but also a tendency to
emulate them on the part of less developed ones.
Nowadays, the phenomenon of globalization may be seen in every field of
worldžs society. The problems faced by the Nations are also global and go beyond their
own borders; the same is happening to the worldžs economy. But, how will these trends
be projected into the future?; Which, will actually be those challenges to be faced by the
new Millenium society?. The purpose of this work is to lay out the existence of those
challenges, many of them have been around us for more than ten years. In this context,
one has to consider both, the transformations in the worldžs political system as well as
the globalizing phenomena in economic and social fields. These challenges, as
remembrances of the future are contemporary and it is today that they must be
faced.
The Problems:
- At a political level: About the world and about the State.
Political Science distinguishes between World order and World development and
its analysis could be based on different models: particularly the real and the ideal
paradigms 1. In this context, the real model interprets the world
in terms of security. Power is observed from an unipolar perspective and economy is
seen from a multipolar point of view. The ideal model on the contrary, takes many other
actors into consideration; it is a paradigm of interdependence, where there are multiple
links and a web of networks, complex systems are to be studied; and in order to analyse
todayžs challenges, both models must be considered. The foundation of both
theoretical models require conceptual approaches in order to review concrete problems
at a world level such as preservation of the planet, or peaceful coexistence of opposed
political and cultural systems.
Is it that the challenge of the future will be the integration - of all countries - to
that, which apparently are going to be the pillars of the future : Democracy and
economic freedom? , will those institutions be the support of worldžs society in the
twenty first century?. It is true that these challenges are important ones , particularly in
the case of less developed countries, but we shall try to find out if really they are going
to be the most important ones.
The bipolar system had, in addition to others, latent conflicts of ethnic, religious
and national minorities nature. These were hidden behind the fear of nuclear war and
the struggle between dominant ideologies . The former masked the problems which
had not been solved after two World Wars. The same problems re-emerged, with
gathered strength. Giles Keppel 2 holds that religious
movements blame society for its anomie, for its lack projects, and consider that
modernity guided by reason without God, has definitely not been able to generate
values. According to Keppel, the vacuity of utopias - may they be liberal or Marxists-
is expressed in the oblivion of the society of men.
Furthermore, this end of century shows conflicting forces, some centrifugal and
other centripetal. The tendency towards globalization in all fields of human action is a
centrifugal force that we can illustrate with the trends in the European Union, for
instance. On a parallel course, all around the planet, one also observes the presence -
violent in many instances - of the opposing tendency, the centripetal one. This is the
case with national and / or separatist forces of the IRA in United Kingdom, of ETA in
Spain, the Chechenians in Russia ( to mention one of them), the Corsican
independence supporters in France, the Northern League in Italy, just to mention the
most known ones.
These are concrete challenges faced by the system of States that suggest the need
for profound transformations, conceptual as well as practical, as to the nature and scope
of Sovereignty and National Security. We can hardly solve problems of the 21st century
with structures built for the 18th century.
Other than those we have just mentioned, what are the most evident problems?.
Definitely, the deterioration of the environment in the whole world is a most important
one (pollution of air, waters, basins, toxic waste, acid rain, gradual destruction of forests
among others).
Less than 20 years ago, political theory considered States and International
Organisations as the International Systemžs almost exclusive actors in support of the
World Order ( or disorder). Such a scheme no longer represents the current reality.
However dysfunctional they may be, we have other actors such as international
terrorism and guerrillas whose action, normally extends beyond national boundaries.
There are also actors whose interests are, apparently more economic than political ,
such as the drug cartels. The present crisis in Colombia is a good example of this.
From a different point of view, although it is difficult to make them fit into the
"actor" category , the marketžs forces and the globalization of the economic and
financial system also exerts a direct influence on the World Order.
Due consideration ought also to be given to the illegal immigration. From day
to day, more and more human contingents, displaced from their own, move to other
countries. Facing the challenge these nomads 3 will
be one of the 21st centuryžs most serious problems.
Finally, one shall have to ask what is Humanityžs weight as an actor, as a subject
of International Law. Until now, International Organizations embrace the concept of
Humanity, and includes many of the planetžs resources as part of its patrimony,
however, thus far it has not gone much more beyond rhetoric. The circumstances of the
coming decades will probably force the world elitežs to advance in this path.
What are the concrete meaning of the decisions and actions to be taken if these
problems that go beyond the concepts of state sovereignty and the international
organizationžs capabilities are going to be solved?. The challenge of the nationžs
political systems lies in its ability to adapt to changes and to be able to modernise its
institution in order to manage the transformations occurring at great speed in all levels.
Decisions must be made as to what structures should be maintained, which institutions
should be strengthened and which have to be eliminated, which law or constitutional
norms should be changed, or left as they are.
At the economic level
When reviewing recent publications, one observes in all kinds of
communications media, be it internet, be it press, be it academic works, that there is
an existence of a very large number of studies dealing with the analysis of what is
occurring in the worldžs economy. There appears to be a particular interest on the
debate around neoliberalism and a more protected economy. Last yearžs strikes in
France acted as a detonator for the discussion that not so long ago centered on the
fight between ideologies represented by capitalism and communism. In effect, there
are some who are of the opinion that the world today is thinking only of material
enrichment, competitiveness and individual satisfaction. Juan Goytisolo 4 for example, says that although "the smiling fatalism" under
which millions of persons immolated themselves in Russia , China or Vietnam has
been a useless sacrifice, today the democratic societies would be seriously wrong if
they believe in the elitežs promises of sudden infinite multiplication of consumer
goods and fluid wealth distribution thanks to the financial, technological and
industrial power. Within the same context, we find de opinions of Ignacio Ramonet
5 who criticises the Ultraliberalismžs idea based on the
premise that the economy prevails over the political issues.. He points out that
although the French favour market economy, they also claim State intervention to
correct the excesses of unlimited free enterprise.
On the other side, there are those who are for free enterprise and who think
that State intervention always creates distortions in the economy with a "dynamics
that leads society on the road of servitude" 6 . On the same
lines, the are the opinions of Julian Simon who points out "that almost all absolute
changes and the absolute component of almost all changes and social and economic
trends, point towards a positive direction". He adds that this is observed when the
issue is considered over a long term and summarises that all aspect of material
human well being are improving in the aggregate 7.
The above mentioned are just a few opinions, but in general, they encompass
the thoughts that characterise both positions.
Notwithstanding the quality of the analysis and the ability of those who carry
them out, I dare to think that free enterprise and democracy are not the elements that
will determine the twenty first centuryžs road. They certainly are most important
factors. It is also true that the prevailing tendency today is for open markets and
globalized economy, but that does not prevent that some countries - whose political
systems can hardly be included as examples of what is known as democracy, are now
the leaders in economic development (Singapore, Taiwan, South Corea). Or that, on
the contrary, some very democratic countries as it is the case of some Latin-American
ones like Costa Rica or Venezuela for instance, have failed to reach, not withstanding
all their efforts, the long sought social well being of their societies.
Thus, the fight between the variety of forms of capitalism and democracy do
effectively constitute a challenge that will have to be surmounted during the 21st
century. The following publications of this series will review the behaviour of various
other factors such as the analysis of world employment trends, and education and health
at a global level in order to provide detectors that establish levels of societyžs well
being.
Another element, which appears to have weight in the analysis, is Social
Capital.
This is a term invented by Coleman in order to explain the human component that
allows members of a specific society to have mutual trust and to cooperate in order to
form new groups and associations. Francis Fukuyama 8 ,
concludes that as long as social capital exists in a society, it is easier to organise it,
otherwise, the scenario becomes more complicated.
There is another idea worth mentioning : that of Jacques Attali, whose work
concludes that the next century will be one of winners and losers; he sketches a future
that may be seen already in the horizon: Globality characterises world problems, drugs,
pollution, poverty and wealth among others are inextricably linked and may not be
solved in a traditional way, " It is necessary rethink institutions...The Earth is
like a library and Life is it most precious book, we must handle it with care" 9.
This work concludes mentioning the challenge that, in my opinion is perhaps the
most important one: that of Knowledge. Undoubtedly, education and the knowledge
resulting therefrom, will make the difference in the next century. Societies that posses
it will be in control of their own destiny.
_______________________
Bibliography
1 . Kennedy, Paul & Hauchler Ingomar, Editors.
Global Trends. The World Almanac of Development and Peace Book. Continuum,
1994.
2 . Kepel, Giles. La revanche de Dieu, Juifs et Musulmans
a la reconquete du monde. Seuil, 1991.
3 . Attali, Jacques. Millenium. Winners and Losers in the
comming World Order, Times Book, 1991
4 . Goytisolo, Juan. Societés Europeenes dans le Carcan
de LžUltraliberalism. Le Monde Diplomatique, Mars 1995.
5 . Ramonet, Ignacio. La Chispa francesa. El Paķs,
Diciembre 1995.
6 . Driscoll, Gerald. The meaning of Hayeck. Cato
institute, May 1995.
7 . Simon, Julian. The State of Humanity. Image.
8 . Fukuyama, Francis, Social Capital and Global
Economy, Foreign Affairs, Vol 74, Nž 5.
9 . Ibid, Attali.
URL: http://www.internet.ve/analitica
Message to the Editor:
editorva@ccs.internet.ve
