The Global Transformation: history, modernity and the making of international relations
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 бер 2015
- Speakers: Professor Barry Buzan, Professor Craig Calhoun, Dr George Lawson, Professor Juergen Osterhammel, Dr Ayse Zarakol
Chair: Dr Heather Jones
Recorded on 17 March 2015 in Hong Kong Theatre, Clement House.
This event marks the launch of a new book: The Global Transformation: history, modernity and the making of international relations, co-authored by Barry Buzan and George Lawson.
Barry Buzan is Emeritus Professor in the Department of International Relations at LSE and a Fellow of the British Academy.
Craig Calhoun (@craigjcalhoun) is Director and President of LSE.
George Lawson is an Associate Professor in the Department of International Relations at LSE.
Jurgen Osterhammel is Professor of Modern History at the University of Konstanz and a Corresponding Fellow of the British Academy.
Ayse Zarakol is a University Lecturer in International Relations at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow at Emmanuel College.
Heather Jones is Associate Professor in the Department of International History at LSE.
The International Relations Department (@LSEIRDept) is one of the oldest as well as largest IR departments in the world.
Dr Ayse Zarakol's commentary is brilliant
In every society one examines, neither changes in the form of government or the introduction of new means of wealth production supplants the rentier elites that dominated all but non-hierarchical tribal societies from the time people began to settle and build permanent communities. From that point on until today the most consistent common denominator of those who live in poverty is landlessness. The degree of landlessness in societies differs by degree only, and landlessness is not simply a factor in self-sufficiency but extends to how people are forced to live and work in population centers.
The historical dynamics were better understood by the political economists of the 18th century than by most social scientists today. One cannot read Anne Robert Jacques Turgot without recognizing the continuum that is our historical and contemporary experience. Thomas Paine's great essay, "Agrarian Justice" offers another insightful analysis of how societal hierarchies are increasingly dominated by rentier elites. This same analysis has recently been presented to us by former World Bank economist Joseph Stiglitz.
Over time, as population has increased the need for and demand for access to nature, the power of some individuals and some entities to extract what others produce without themselves producing anything in exchange only increases. This condition exists internally in every country.
The rentier elite today includes multinational corporate entities that acquire (often because of corrupt domestic leaderships) the ability under the laws of individual societies to extract minerals, timber, fish and other natural resources with nominal compensation to the people who live in these societies. Increasingly, agricultural land is acquired for the production of cash crops exported to external markets, resulting in a loss of domestic food production and price increases for basic food.
We see the same degree of absentee landlordism in many societies today that impoverished an Irish population for centuries. Also consistent with the Irish experience, independence and the introduction of so-called land reforms (e.g., "land to the tiller" programs) only created the basis for the rise of a new rentier elite.
The authors of this new study may have treated these issues and offered the solution, which is for societies to use taxation to capture the rent of land and land-like assets (e.g., the broadcast spectrum, take-off and landing slots at airports, licenses under which natural resources are extracted from publicly-held land and the seas). As Winston Churchill declared campaigning for a seat in the House of Commons in 1909, monopoly privilege must be eliminated from societies in order to achieve a just distribution of wealth, and, as he told his audiences, the monopoly of land is "the mother of all monopolies."
+Edward Dodson plz tell me how can i download this video from you tube ?
+Fayyaz Shoaib There are several software programs (some free) that will allow you to download video to your computer. I suggest you do a Google search for these programs and choose one.
Edward Dodson thanks
CONGRATULATIONS 👏 AND BEST WISHES ❤️ FOR ORGANIZING SUCH A WONDERFUL EVENT REGARDS FROM Dr RAVINDER TALWAR INDIA
Personally, the historical transformation with regards to modern international relations indeed involves in the drastic shift of human nature from passions and pursuits to certain commonly-held national missions or ideologies, which led to two world wars for example, to the increasingly prevailing individualism as well as materilism as today's status quo.
Granted, fatal and deadly heated or even nuclear wars might be less likely to occur, due to such extreme individualism and other considerations raised by politicians and general public. After all, self-interest maximisation is the priority for all international relation affairs rather than any slight sacrifice.Therefore, the majority of politicians or leaders today prefer to delay anything they regard as potentially undermining their reputations or positions, perfect cases in point are the inactive reactions in several European countries concerning active terrorism attacks, other than the so-called political correctiveness! Not to mention that a wide variety of serious threats, also including North Korea nulcear crisis, cannot be addressed, yet an easy task half a century ago, when human kinds are still willing to strive for true changes for a better world.
In general, I would argue that human beings might be of no hope given contemporary international relation scenerios, where on one hand, the key national and global decision-makers only speak rather than act, such as Obama's cliche for change in 2008; on the other hand, the mass public, are generally far less contributive and reluctant to concern the public good. It is especially the case for the younger generations nowadays. The combination of both undoutedly guide the modern international relations and may push humans to the edge of calamity!
Noticeably, all the degradation of humanity and the mentioned disasters can be traced back to the end of WW2, when the US dominated the capitalism world along with the so-called Anglo-Saxon societal development pattern, overemphasising the power of capital and profits. I admit that such pattern could lead to the advances of hi-tech and the surges in global wealth. Nevertheless, have those big fishes in Google,Microsoft, or Wall Street ever considered the end of such pattern: the depletion of natural resources, the entirely distorted human natures and the massive job cuts, the list goes on, an absolute dark picture to us. the rampant artificial intelligence can be a typical example.
Meanwhile, it is the United States after WW2, which tolerated the Communism, causing China and North Korea to embrace such totalitarism with unprecedentedly blood and casualties. Even Germany in WW2 would definitely not allow such to take place! Until now, the American political elites and business giants still suck up China for their interests in such vulnerable country, at the expense of Chinese commoners' life standard and well-being. Thanks to the globalisation, which essentially benefits the minority rather than the majority! Could we understand that this is the Anglo-Saxon fashion without baselines ? If so, shall we rescrutise the modern international relations and development pattern after WW2? Whether the rise of the US is a blessing or cursing??
All in all, human beings, in my eyes, should and must rethink the modern international relations and the developmental patterns, particularly in post-WW2 periods, correlating them to the human natures. Most significantly, the impacts exercised by the US and its relevant Anglo-Saxon pattern really call for thorough reconsiderations.
.
Begin at 4:45
Speak to the MIC
The professor must be an obscurantist or he is nothing; he has a special and unmatchable talent for dullness, his central aim is not to expose the truth clearly, but to exhibit his profundity, his esotericity - in brief to stagger sophomores and other professors.
-H.L. Menchen
How to reveal your too stupid to argue against points you disagree with.