Page 208 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

194 Globalization and Democracy

We also looked, in chapter 2 , at how states are transforming in global
governance, to the point where they are now better seen as “ international-
izing ” rather than as nation - states. But if states are internationalizing,
what happens to democracy, which was formed, and fought for, in nation -
states? State transformation in global governance is a problem for the
modern ideal of democracy because it requires autonomous and sovereign
states. The ideal of “ actually existing ” democracy is that “ the people, ”
identifi ed as “ the nation, ” are able to take charge, albeit indirectly through
their representatives, of the conditions of their own lives. In effect, democ-

racy involves attempting to influence governments to use the special
privileges of the state (the threat of force and the regulation and redistri-
bution of wealth) to act for “ the people. ” Voting to elect governments is
just one aspect of democracy, but it is the most clear - cut and obvious; it
is what most people understand by democracy and, as democracy involves
rule by the people, the common understanding certainly should not be
ignored. If globalization means that processes previously managed by the
state now escape its control or can only be managed with the cooperation
of unelected agencies both inside and outside the state, what are the
implications for democracy?
The second main limitation of existing representative democracy in
globalization is rather the reverse of this problem: if processes of global-
ization which impact on peoples ’ lives are not, by defi nition, confi ned

within national territories, why should definitions of “ national interest ”
be all - important in international affairs? Many political theorists now
argue that what is more important is that “ all affected ” by a particular

issue are able to influence how it is dealt with in ways that are relevant
to their lives. “ All - affected ” by an issue may, on occasion, live within the
territorial borders of a state, but this was never necessarily the case, and
processes of globalization make it rare today. Globalization raises the
question, “ who is the people? ” , which is no longer settled by the response,
“ the nation. ” The “ all - affected ” principle of democratic participation
seems intuitively right: if democracy is about control over the conditions
of people ’ s lives, it is irrelevant that some people happen to live within
the same territorial boundaries; what is important is that all those affected
by an issue, within and across borders, must have some impact on how
their difficulties are resolved. If it is immensely hard to see how it can be

put into practice (How to decide precisely who is affected? Who is to
decide each time?), the “ all affected ” principle is certainly a compelling
criticism of the idea that democracy can be contained within national
territories (Held, 1995a ; Held, 2004 : 98 – 102; Gould, 2004 : 176 – 8;
Fraser, 2008 : 64 – 7).