Page 76 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

62 Politics in a Small World

their theory of culture. For Meyer et al., cultural meaning is “ more
cognitive and instrumental than expressive ” (Meyer et al., 1997 : 149); it
concerns the communication of knowledge and technical reasoning rather
than what is more commonly understood by “ culture ” : active interpreta-
tions of events and processes, strongly held or deep - rooted beliefs and

values, and passionately embodied identifications. Indeed, Meyer et al.
explicitly see the diffusion of cultural norms in terms of a set of scripts
that can be, and are, adopted without much diffi culty anywhere.
More interpretative methodologies lead to a set of questions that are
not easily addressed from within the terms of the theory of “ world
polity. ” If the globally diffused “ scripts ” of human rights, development,
universal education, and so on regularly fail in practice, although they are
apparently legitimated by world society actors, surely this points to dif-
ferences in the meaning of these scripts in different settings. Who defi nes
what form states should take in practice, and how? To give an example
in terms of human rights principles, there is no doubt that agreements on
civil and political rights are far more important to IGOs than those that
require international cooperation to further the social and economic rights
of the most impoverished people in the world (An ’ Naim, 2002 ). This is
despite the fact that the vast majority of states in the world have signed
and ratifi ed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which
(especially as it is supported by the International Convention on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights [ICESCR]) in principle commits them to
do all they can to ensure that everyone in the world has certain basic
minimum requirements in terms of food, shelter, education, and health-
care. International law has been established concerning human rights to
alleviate poverty, and there has been continual emphasis on the impor-
tance of such rights by the leaders of developing countries and by INGOs,
but its very existence is practically unknown outside certain circles (see

Nash, 2009a : chapter 5 ). Insofar as world culture is unified, it is because

it is very difficult for those without authority to challenge the assumptions
of the leaders of Western states about who and what is important.
Theorists of “ world polity ” do not ask questions about power and inter-
pretation that would enable us to understand how establishing the unity
of the world polity, if it is indeed possible, is inevitably caught up in chal-
lenging and re - creating hegemony.
The theory of “ world polity ” is an important and infl uential contribu-
tion to understanding the development of globalization in terms of politi-
cal institutions. Although the positivist methodology adopted by Meyer
and his colleagues creates problems in terms of understanding differences
of perspective and power in the creation of global norms and practices,