Globalization: Social & Geographic Perspectives

a blog

The Decling Authority of States & Global Organized Crime by Ramin Mahgerefteh

October 26th, 2010 · 3 Comments
Apr 5/Political Globalization & Cultural Globalization · Uncategorized

According to Susan Strange, “There will be power struggles between branches of the state of bureaucracy. Both the unity and the authority of government is bound to suffer”.  The government may be the last to recognise that they and their ministers have lost the authority over national societies and economies that they used to have.  People no longer believe the government.  She believes that the time has come to consider a few of the entrenched ideas of some academic colleagues in economics, politc, sociology and international relations.  She argues her point with the neglected factor of technology and the neglect of finance.

Now a days technology has rapidly change over the past 100 years.  It has made things convienet, simplier and faster.  “There is no reason to suppose that technological change in products and processes, drvien by profit, will not continue to accelerate in future”, is a very important and efficent point that Susan strange points out.  Technology is a huge part of the global economy.  technology will change the future.  “Besides the acceleration pace of technology change, there has been an escalation in the capital cost of most technology innovations in agriculture, manufactoring and the provision of services, in the new product and in new proccess”.  This is a great point, many countries have inputs of capital rising and has lobar falling.

The idea of the criminalization and the rise of the state as a courtesan was that the role of the state is to balance and restrain the passions of its citizens.  Globalization of organized crime weakens the very basis of government and constrains its capacity.   “criminals elements do not seek to take over the state, they are obviously not revolutionary movements seeking sizes its apparatuses”, said author James H. Mittelman.  criminal groups are a source of social organization.  they challenge the power and authprity of the state to impose its standards.  Media always has one sided conflict when war occurs.  States is less autonomous with diminshed ability to control the borders.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 responses so far ↓

  • 1    amy72089 // Oct 28, 2010 at 9:19 pm

    I agree with you that technology has grown a lot and that countries have inputs of rising capital and falling labor due to the advances in technology, and that can lead to the deterioration of the state. In your 2nd response to the global organized crime u state how the state is less autonomous with diminished ability to control the borders- i agree with this and i believe that this is an example of globalization because of the deregulation of governments in society.

  • 2    Prof. Hala // Nov 1, 2010 at 1:09 pm

    I think you’re right to underscore the importance of rising capital intensity. The rising capital/labor ratio in production — in different sectors and in different economies in aggregate terms — has critical implications for employment/unemployment all over the world. While rising rising capital intensity in an economy is often associated with rising standards of living, we know that the benefits are not distributed evenly. Lower-skilled workers who lack mobility suffer most — and may fall prey to global organized crime groups.

    In your comments on Mittelman, you say that “media always has one-sided conflict when war occurs.” I’m not sure what you mean. That media only broadcast “pro-war” or “pro-government” views (i.e., propaganda)?

  • 3    raminm21 // Nov 30, 2010 at 2:36 am

    I fell that media shows only one side stories. For example: In Iraq, the media only shows our point of view as an American. It doesn’t have Iraq’s point of view. The news their is probably the opposite of what is in America. People should understand both point of views their media.

You must log in to post a comment.