Search Results

Paths of domestication and externalization facilitate the rise of European social movements. Chapter 4 addresses the ways in which, the construction of European institutions, as well as the policies chosen by the EU, are increasingly the object of lively responses by loose networks of local, national, and transnational actors. Focusing on recent EU counter-summits and European Social Forums as better developed examples of a European social movement, its points at the signs of a declining ‘permissive consensus’ around the EU, nevertheless suggesting that criticism towards Europe is not oriented to rejecting the need for a European level of governance, nor the development of a European identity. Looking at the frames and discourses of activists participating in the first European Social Forum in Florence in 2002, as well as those of their organizations, it analysis the emerging forms of a European social movement made up of loosely structured ‘networks of networks’ of activists endowed with multiple associational memberships and experiences with various forms of political participation.

This book discusses how the Saffron Revolution sustained the hopes and aspirations of the people of modern Myanmar for a free and democratic Burma. However, the majority of Burma experts declared the pro-democracy movement a failure. The domestic pro-democracy movement which first emerged in 1988 in Burma transformed over the decades into a transnational social movement, resulting in a new model. The Burmese pro-democracy movement built on new transnational networks in order to initiate innovative campaigns, using legal mechanisms to expose how democratic states and multinational corporations were supporting the oppressive regime. The movement, through so-called “transnational legal actions,” created transnational legal spaces and attempted to challenge the neoliberal conceptions of justice and democracy.

This chapter explores the implications of a poor-led, pro-poor approach to poverty reduction for the question of political responsibility. The author argues that once poor-led social movements are acknowledged as vital for transformative social change, different responsibilities emerge—for diverse agents—than those commonly stipulated by global justice theorists. The chapter develops the idea that there is a “political responsibility for solidarity” with poor-led organizations and social movements: those with resources and political freedoms can and should help to support, defend, and amplify the agendas of these groups. After considering some key features and normative criteria of political solidarity, the author discusses how a political responsibility to act in solidarity with poor-led organizations and social movements might be taken up by differently located (individual and collective) actors in the global North and South. The chapter also addresses some tensions raised by the suggestion that nonpoor “outsiders”—including individuals and organizations or institutions with comparative power and privilege—can learn to be effective allies, working in solidarity with poor activists.

This chapter focuses on border politics on the redrawn border of the Ukraine and the EU to interrogate how transnational social movements that seek to challenge territorial borders can also actively construct internal social borders. It analyzes the case of No Border Camp, a convergence of over three hundred activists from countries around the world, to protest unjust immigration enforcement and the militarization of European borders. Activists involved in these transnational initiatives confronted tensions that emerged around “borders of difference” and power disparities, which limited the impact of the movement's antiauthoritarian practices. While differences of language and region were pronounced and impacted network-building within the camp, collaborative efforts to advocate for more just border enforcement were also hindered by varied understandings of appropriate antiauthoritarian organizing strategies. Although the mobilization was successful in achieving some goals, global economic inequalities as well as activists' divergent relationships to and imaginaries of place inhibited the implementation of anticapitalist, antinationalist politics. In this case, organizing across borders of identity or nationality affirmed differences, rather than blurring or transcending them. Despite activists' rejection of liberal rights discourses that are foundational to nation-states, they confronted tensions emerging from national origin as well as the geopolitical power relations among countries.

This chapter discusses the transnational social movements that link the North and South. It looks at the concept of fair trade, which carries many meanings in modern usage. It notes that the Fair Trade Movement has continued to grow rapidly, and that most of the growth in the U.S. and U.K. markets comes from the competitive introduction of Fair Trade products in major chains. Some of these products include Whole Foods Markets, Costco, and Wal-Mart. It also looks at the scale and effects of fair trade, and the evolving struggles within the movement.

The writer envisages a “relocation” of Cultural Studies in a closer relation to public institutions active in international struggles for social justice. By situating the discipline in relation to formalized “institutional rules of engagement” — in particular those of international human rights law — He envisages a metamorphosis of its worldly practice into one that perhaps invests as much in professional training and public participation as it does in critique.

This book’s synthesis of peace research and security studies shows, ironically, that US security can be better served by turning away from the national security paradigm of political realism and toward a broader human security paradigm of “empirical realism.” US security benefits are likely to be greater from maximizing the correlates of peace than from maximizing US military power. Tempering narrow nationalism with increased respect for human dignity can help implement the correlates of positive reciprocity, equity, human security, enhanced international law, and democratic global governance. Progress in these areas would enable transforming the existing militarized-balance-of-power system into a more complex global governing system that empowers transnational political, economic, environmental, religious, and other influences to move all states’ conduct toward serving the common good. A global grand strategy for human security, which would include US security within it, can succeed where a national grand strategy for US security is likely to fail.

This chapter demonstrates how a thick conception of development necessitates an examination of both law and culture. First, the chapter deals with culture change in Turkey, Japan, and Germany., which postconflict This chapter centers on Japan’s experience, particularly its modernization in the Meiji era. Japan’s drive to modernize involved the active participation of many civic organizations, not just directives issued by a ruler. The chapter also discusses efforts by different countries as well as nongovernmental organizations involved in transnational social movements. The chapter then explores efforts taken in Kosovo, East Timor, Iraq, and Afghanistan. These case studies show how actors, mainly the United Nations and United States, have tried to establish legal systems in countries that have recently been embroiled in conflict and unrest. An important element to consider is the effect of security, or rather a lack of security, on forces attempting to implement law and development.

Because successful US security policies in the future will require implementing the correlates of peace rather than simply maximizing US military power, forward-looking policymakers and citizens will need to exert substantial pressures within the United States, as well as to build support from friendly transnational social movement organizations, to bring desired policies into being. To achieve change at home and to engage effectively abroad necessitates bolstering US democracy by requiring the electoral college to follow the popular vote; reducing gerrymandering; stopping voter suppression; encouraging honest public debate and civic education on global issues; countering threats to democratic integrity from officials’ dishonesty, populism, social media amplification of falsehoods, and the influence of huge monetary contributions on electoral and legislative processes; and broadening US national interests to serve the human security needs of all. Transnational networking also helps to address increasing democratic deficits that every country encounters from growing interdependence and globalization.